[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge packag
From: |
c. |
Subject: |
Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ? |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:32:11 +0100 |
On 10 Feb 2014, at 09:09, Julien Bect <address@hidden> wrote:
> Dear Octave forge maintainers,
>
> A while ago I announced a new release of the STK, version 2.1.0, a toolbox
> developped and maintained by my colleague Emmanuel Vazquz and myself :
>
> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/STK-2-1-0-released-td4660018.html
Looks like a very useful tool!
> I would love to see our toolbox distributed as an Octave forge package...
> what would be the requirements for that ?
Essentially you should just ask to create a mercurial repository on Octave
Forge for your package.
> Our project is currently hosted on Sourceforge
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/kriging) and we want to keep it that way, so
> I'm thinking of something like the LTFAT, which is distributed as an Octave
> forge package but hosted on a separate repository.
yes, that should be possible as long as you also clone your repository in
Octave Forge.
But can you explain why you care to have double distribution?
> I have started to write a Python script that prepares a tar.gz with all the
> required files for an Octave package (DESCRIPTION, PKG_ADD, PKG_DEL and so
> on). It is not finished yet, but already produces a valid package that can be
> installed using Octave's pkg command :
>
> http://sourceforge.net/p/kriging/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/admin/make_octave_package.py
I think that is at least the third such script that has been created,
IMHO it would be better to have that written in Octave language though ...
> Our documentation is currently in plain text format, but I can wrap it in
> @deftypefn + @verbatim texinfo environments (again, as done in the Octave
> package release of the LTFAT package).
that's actually not even necessary, we have other packages that use plain text
docstrings, usually when they want to keep matlab compatibility.
> Would there be any other requirement for our toolbox to be distributed as an
> octave forge package ?
maybe you could also check whether your package has
conflicts/overlaps/redundancies with respect to other existing packages.
> @++
> Julien
c.
- Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Julien Bect, 2014/02/10
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?,
c. <=
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, peter, 2014/02/10
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Julien Bect, 2014/02/10
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Carnë Draug, 2014/02/11
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Julien Bect, 2014/02/11
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Julien Bect, 2014/02/24
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Carnë Draug, 2014/02/24
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Julien Bect, 2014/02/24
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Carnë Draug, 2014/02/24
- Re: Requirements for releasing the STK toolbox as an Octave forge package ?, Julien Bect, 2014/02/24