[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IEEE standard for interval arithmetic approved

From: Oliver Heimlich
Subject: Re: IEEE standard for interval arithmetic approved
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 22:01:15 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0

Marco, Julien,

thanks for discussing this topic further. I had not been aware of Marco's use case.

On 12.06.2015 21:17, Marco Atzeri wrote:
On 6/12/2015 8:18 PM, Julien Bect wrote:
But anyway: please never package stk directly from the repo. If a
release hasn't been made, it means that the code is not ready to be
released. Please use the latest public release.

If it works and I do not see a long list of bugfixes, sure.

stk-2.3.0 builds fine.
interval-0.2.1 does't not build. So some the latest updates
are needed.

The build problem is caused by bug #45280 and fixed in the repository? Of not, please send a bug report. The package currently is barely distributed elsewhere and we must sort out these kind of bugs, because I don't have the possibility to test on so many platforms.

I should make some points about the interval package clear:

1. I very much appreciate your work as a redistributor. If there are any problems encountered I am glad to offer solutions.

2. For the last half year I have made regular releases (approximately) every 4 weeks. The recently fixed build bug will soon be resolved in a new version. You should wait until then or manually patch version 0.2.1 with the updated src/Makefile from the repository.

3. I have never seen it as a use case that somebody (read: not the maintainer) would make a release from the mercurial export and not use the official release tarballs.

The mercurial export for the interval package is missing several files:
- COPYING and NEWS (generated from TexInfo sources)
- png, pdf and eps versions of images for the included manual (generated from various sources) - generated unit tests for verification of the package (which, in this particular field, is very important)

I have decided against putting those files under version control, which means they are missing in your export.

Also the mercurial repo might contain work in progress that is not ready for release.

I would highly prefer if only the official release tarball is used for further redistribution. Otherwise you would label something as version 0.2.1, which it is actually not.

If this is not an option for you, we should resolve any of the bad consequences described above.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]