Re: Project Infrastructure

[Mike Miller]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 14:50:59 -0400, John W. Eaton wrote:
> It's not only about where it is hosted, or whether they are hosted and
> developed together, but about whether having what appears to be a single web
> site will provide a better experience for users.  People used to be
> constantly confused by having both Octave and Octave Forge projects. Were
> they the same?  Different?  Was Octave Forge a different version of Octave?
> Why aren't the Octave sources on Octave Forge?  Why can't I find packages on
> the Octave site.  Etc.
> 
> For the users, I think it would be good if we had a single web site, where
> everything appears under the same domain name.

Maybe, maybe not. I haven't been following closely, but the Forge
project is working through its own reorganization. It may end up being
more than one collection of packages, and some package maintainers may
want to be more closely affiliated with Octave than others, some may
value autonomy and differentiation more than others.

I think it might be advantageous to users to have a unified web
interface for Octave and packages, but that doesn't necessarily mean
unified hosting, either for docs or code or both.

Also remember that there are some things hosted on the Forge project
that GNU Octave may not be able to or willing to host, such as
MSVC-built Octave binaries, macOS binaries, etc.

-- 
mike