[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge
From: |
Ben Abbott |
Subject: |
Re: [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge |
Date: |
Sun, 19 Aug 2012 12:53:48 -0400 |
On Aug 19, 2012, at 7:28 AM, JuanPi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Carne rose the issue that the names single, bundle and forge weren't
> meant to stick. I personally like them. But maybe is time to collect
> some ideas
>
> In general lines the names stand for
>
> * Single: A upload of a single file. The only requirement are that it
> is code usable in Octave and that the file is released under a GPL
> compatible license.
> * Bundle: A zip file with multiple files. May or may not have the
> structure of a package. Even with package structure it is not
> guaranteed that it will install.
> * Forge: A zip file containing the structure of a package. A Forge
> package must install correctly, must work and all GNU Octave coding
> criteria applies.
>
> Any body against these names? If so, please give alternatives.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> JuanPi Carbajal
I like the idea of using consistent names. Is there a reason to use "Single"
instead of "Function", and "Forge" instead of "Package"?
Ben
- [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, JuanPi, 2012/08/19
- Re: [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge,
Ben Abbott <=
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, Benjamin Lewis, 2012/08/19
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, c., 2012/08/20
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2012/08/20
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, John W. Eaton, 2012/08/20
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, Carnë Draug, 2012/08/20
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, JuanPi, 2012/08/20
- Re: [OctDev] [Agora] Single, Bundle, Forge, Carlo de Falco, 2012/08/21