Re: hosting mingw binaries for octave

[Benjamin Lindner]

> Benjamin Lindner wrote:
> > Hello list,
> >
> > I wanted to grab some feedback on the mingw binary hosting.
> > Since I personally don't have the webspace to provide bianries, I am 
> > thinking of creating a sourceforge project. 
> Test binaries I can put up on my personal machine like I did for
> Michael's MSVC binaries.. However, real releases I'd prefer no to as my
> upload bandwidth is not unlimited... However, I'd suggest that any full
> releases are done through octave-forge. We already have MSVC and Mac OSX
> binaries on octave-forge, so adding a MinGW binary would not be any
> issue. It might need a little bit of reorganization of the file release
> system, though that can be rethought out once you have a binary you are
> happy with.

Good point. 
How can I get access to the octave-forge project?

> > This would also provide 
> > nice means of integrating all building scripts and developing them
> > in future.
> >   
> There are build scripts for MSVC and Mac in the octave-forge CVS, there
> are also very out of date ones for cygwin there as well. I'd suggest
> that there will be lots of similarities with the MSVC build of Michael
> and so ideally the MinGW and MSVC builds might share the same build
> scripts.. Check
> 
> http://octave.cvs.sourceforge.net/octave/octave-forge/admin/Windows/msvc/

Maybe yes, maybo no. But this should not be a stumbling point.
Oh, I see that octave-forge uses cvs. Any chance this changes to svn?
No? Then I definitely need to learn cvs, too ...

Hosting all relases on octave-forge can make use of synergies, though.
For example the source code for dependencies for win32...

> > So I wanted to 
> > 1) check with the "officials": any objections?
> > 2) ask, what's considered "good practice" for a name? 
> > 3) ask, (since it's my fist time doing this) any pitfalls?
> > 4) Better ways of doing it?
> >   
> See above..
> 
> > Hints+tips are very welcome, I'd like to have it done in a way that 
> > has the 'vision' of being still useful in 3 years with octave 5.0 ...
> >   
> Useful in 3 years to me means having a maintainer that is likely to stay
> connected to the distribution :-)

Touché :). Ja, I see the point, but hey, this is implicitly clear, 
so I didn't bother mentioning it. 
The comment was more meant in the way, that if I - for whatsoever 
reason - am not connected to the binary, it is not too hard for 
others to see and understand what I did...
Providing binary releases does only make sense if there is also
maintainance for them, this is clear.

benjamin

-- 
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört?
Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger