Re: Catching up to Matlab

[Jaroslav Hajek]

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> From: Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: Catching up to Matlab
>> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <address@hidden>
>> Cc: "John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>, address@hidden
>> Date: Sunday, November 14, 2010, 11:55 AM
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:01 PM,
>> Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Tue, 11/2/10, John W. Eaton <address@hidden>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: John W. Eaton <address@hidden>
>> >> Subject: Re: Catching up to Matlab
>> >> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <address@hidden>
>> >> Cc: "Judd Storrs" <address@hidden>,
>> address@hidden
>> >> Date: Tuesday, November 2, 2010, 8:33 AM
>> >> On  2-Nov-2010, Sergei Steshenko
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> | I am seriously considering volunteering, but
>> _my_ way.
>> >> The idea is
>> >> | trivially simple:
>> >> |
>> >> | to modify 'octave' built-in 'help' function in a
>> manner
>> >> it will in
>> >> | addition to displaying 'octave' built-in
>> documentation
>> >> will display
>> >> | the corresponding Matlab documentation by
>> invoking WEB
>> >> browser with
>> >> | URL pointing to Matlab documentation of the
>> same
>> >> function.
>> >>
>> >> You are free to do what you like with the help
>> function
>> >> (subject to
>> >> the terms of the GPL) but I don't think a patch
>> like you
>> >> describe will
>> >> be accepted as part of Octave.  I certainly would
>> not
>> >> apply it, and
>> >> would likely remove it if someone else did.
>> >>
>> >> jwe
>> >>
>> >
>> > I didn't expect any other answer :).
>> >
>>
>> You would be quite naive if you did. Why on Earth should
>> Octave want
>> such a thing?
>>
>
> Because Octave _users_ need _good_ documentation and can't care less about
> the developers' ideological objections to providing a link.
>

And the developers can't care less about users' "needs", right?