On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 09:34:11PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > | Anyway, the changes for quantlib itself are trivial, and as discussed > | previously, quantlib-ruby and quantlib-python need to be brought up-to-date > | to fix a FTBFS problem, so those updates are all ok. Does the same build > | problem apply to quantlib-refman and quantlib-refman-html? If not, I don't > Those are binary all, and they don't really "build". I just re-wrap the > upstream tarball of html files (from doxygen) and the pdf file for these two. > | think we'll want to update those if it's not necessary. Likewise, it > | doesn't sound like r-cran-rquantlib needs updating. > Well yes -- 0.1.11 corresponded to the 0.3.8 we are replacing in testing. So > 0.1.12 would make more sense. Ok. If they aren't broken, we won't fix them. quantlib-ruby and quantlib-python are known to be broken, because the previous versions FTBFS against the new quantlib. The others would be updated only if there's a corresponding reason to do so. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature