Re: [Octave Forge] Octave 4.0 call for packages

[Oliver Heimlich]

On 11.04.2015 03:25, Mike Miller wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 01:49:42 +0200, Oliver Heimlich wrote:
> > Several warnings during compile: error: writing file 'C:\.octave_hist': 
> > Permission denied
>
> This is bug #41131.

Thanks for the info.


> > Summing up the current versions of Octave Forge packages I get the following
> > impression. Please don't take the categories too serious, because I have no
> > detailed knowledge of most packages. I just ran the tests.
>
> Would you mind sharing the test failures you are seeing? Either as bug
> reports against each package or a summary log file sent to the list or
> posted somewhere. Full output would be most helpful as many developers
> are unable to test on Windows.
>
> Thanks,

I am going to put the results into our wiki [1] as a table. I can put 
the test logs on a private website and link to them in the table. Then, 
we can collect references to existing bug reports/patches in a 
structured way. This should simplify the assessment of all packages 
together. And it might help to sort out deprecated packages.


On 06.04.2015 22:17, Carnë Draug wrote:> On 15 March 2015 at 15:04, Mike 
Miller <address@hidden> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> The imminent Octave 4.0.0 release will be the first to supply an
>> official binary distribution of Octave for Windows operating systems.
>> This distribution will include a set of Octave Forge packages that may
>> be installed at the user's option. This is why we would like to have
>> compatible packages ready to incorporate into the next release candidate
>> for further testing.
>>
>
> Can users that have installed Octave with such installer then install
> more packages and other versions of those packages?
>
> If we are starting to distribute binaries of Octave core, would be nice
> if we can also distribute binaries for the packages, specially since the
> release cycle of core and OF is quite different.
>
> Carnë

This is an important point. The only benefit of pre-installed packages 
IMHO is that the user can (1) be sure that the package is compatible and 
(2) save some compilation time for package installation.

Contrariwise, we have the disadvantage that new users have to care less 
about packages and maybe never find out that they can get more packages 
or newer versions from Octave Forge.

Oliver

[1] probably going to be here: http://wiki.octave.org/Octave-Forge