Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
* Michael Creel <michael.creel@uab.es> [2005-11-23 15:46]:I have had some trouble getting o-f CVS to compile against Octave 2.1.72. Has anyone else had problems? MichaelThis is a belated reply but, indeed, compilation of octave-forge fails miserably in my Debian unstable system with the latest version of octave. Question to the octave-forge crew: are there any plans to release a new version of octave-forge compatible with Octave 2.1.72?
I had just been wondering the same thing. As far as I can tell, it looks like we've reached a point where it's time to branch octave-forge. The current aging release of octave-forge compiles with octave 2.1.72, but not 2.9.4. The CVS doesn't compile with 2.9.4, and apparently (I haven't tried it) not with 2.1.72 either. It doesn't compile with 2.9.4 because the sparse stuff conflicts with the sparse stuff that's now in octave 2.9.x, but it compiles if the sparse directory is disabled. Furthermore, there are some functions like print.m that have been included in octave that are no longer necessary in octave-forge. I think octave-forge needs a little house cleaning and a new release, perhaps two: a 2.9.x compatible branch and a 2.1.x compatible branch. Has anyone kept track of what has been added to octave that can be removed from octave-forge? I'm not sufficiently familiar with CVS to know how to create branches. How does one go about doing that?
I ought to raise one further question: what's the future of octave-forge? It seems like the new package system will result in it eventually going away, with things either being absorbed into octave or into smaller, more manageable packages. Until then, who's in charge of octave-forge? It seems like Paul doesn't have the time he used to for this--does it make sense to designate some other project leader(s) (I am not volunteering)?
-Quentin