Re: Octave 3.6.1 mingw for windows - updated

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 5 April 2012 16:47, PhilipNienhuis <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso-2 wrote

>> If Windows had a nicer packaging infrastructure, it would be nice
>> if you could say "pkg install package" and the package would
>> install forever. Sadly, it doesn't, and "pkg install" is
>> essentially useless in Windows,
>>
>
> I'm a bit confused. From where did you get this idea?
>
> "pkg install package" perfectly works in Windows,

How perfectly does it work for tracking dependencies? For example,
will it download and install GiNaC if you use the symbolic package?
Will it almost never result in users complaining about not being able
to compile packages?

If it doesn't do this, I consider it essentially useless.

>> I think in this case, trying to make things too convenient for
>> users doesn't expose them to the intricacies of the underlying
>> problems,

> I'd rather think that convenience should NOT be avoided, not even
> for the sake of "exposing them to intricacies .... etc". We should
> rather focus on solving those intricacies.

Those intricacies are too difficult to solve. They require a close
collaboration between Octave and Octave-Forge, a fully functional
packaging system for Windows, and tireless packagers working on
Windows.

If we can't solve them, it's worse to try to hide them and pretend
that everything is working fine. It's not. Octave and Octave-Forge is
made by many individuals, who are at odds at each other, and can't
agree on what certain functions should do. Packaging for Windows is
very hard because Windows is a hostile environment for free
development. We don't have enough people working on solving these
problems, despite your efforts and mine.

- Jordi G. H.