[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: IEEE standard for interval arithmetic approved

From: Marco Atzeri
Subject: Re: IEEE standard for interval arithmetic approved
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 23:35:03 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0

On 6/12/2015 10:01 PM, Oliver Heimlich wrote:
Marco, Julien,

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

The build problem is caused by bug #45280 and fixed in the repository?

It seems that

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.

latest revision plus touch build.
But as you are planning another release shortly, I can wait it.

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.

not so unusual for me. And not only for forge packages.

The mercurial export for the interval package is missing several files:
- COPYING and NEWS (generated from TexInfo sources)

COPYING is a "hard" requirement from "pkg build .."

- 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.

If missing than they should be built during a "pkg build"

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

Possible. My personal experience says also unlikely.
But I never packaged before your.

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.

I would call 0.2.1r590 (as package)

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

waiting your next release



reply via email to

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