Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] Lenny is out, time for work
* Thomas Weber <thomas.weber.mail@gmail.com> [2009-02-19 13:14]:
> Done for octave2.1-forge, #516106
> [snip]
> Done, #516111
> [snip]
> Done, #516112
Thanks!
> Am Donnerstag, den 19.02.2009, 00:24 +0100 schrieb Rafael Laboissiere:
> > Packages octaviz and octplot build and work with octave3.0. We could put
> > these packages in a "feature freeze" mode and only fix the bugs in the
> > Debian packaging.
>
> For Octaviz, okay. For octplot, I'm still in favor of removing it. If
> 3.2 comes out, I'm not sure octplot still provides any benefit over the
> default plotting system.
>
> I think any second spent with octplot is better spent improving Octave's
> plotting system.
I fully agree. This is why I proposed a "feature freeze" for octplot and
octaviz, unless upstream development starts again for the later.
> Octaviz (or rather VTK) provide some pretty unique things, so I see some
> benefit in keeping it.
>
> > As regards the octave packages themselves, if octave3.2 is released in the
> > squeeze cycle, we could keep octave3.0 also in squeeze and remove it in
> > squeeze+1, like we did with octave2.1 and lenny. If octaviz and octplot
> > only work with octave3.0 and not with octave3.2, then they will also be
> > removed in squeeze+1. In this case, we should put a warning in the
> > description of these packages telling about their future removal.
>
> I think if these packages don't work with 3.2, we shouldn't ship them in
> Squeeze. I mean, by the time of Squeeze's release, there will not have
> been any release for these package for 3 years.
I agree with your last sentence. However, since octave3.0 will be in
squeeze regardless of the fact that octave3.2 is released or not, then it
makes sense to keep octplot as well. What I am proposing is to make a
staged removal of packages, keeping them at least for one release extra
release of Debian, giving the users the time to upgrade their applications.
BTW, this is what we did for octave2.1.
--
Rafael
Reply to: