Re: Octave for Windows

[Agustin Barto]

I think someone (jwe?) should at least set the minimum requirements for
an Octave for Windows distro.

By the way, I stopped updating my distro simply because the version
that's on my page is the last that worked fine on Windows9x/ME. I made
new packages but I don't like ditributing something that works fine on
some versions of Windows and poorly on the others. I check every month
to see if the newer cygwin versions deal with the forks on Windows9x/ME
the proper way. So far I got the same crappy results (illops, hangs,
etc.)

There's also the fact, that we're about to switch from Octave to SciLab.
Although we are satisfied with what we did with Octave in the last year
and a half, using it on Windows creates too many problems. We figured
out the Matlab compatibility is not an issue anymore, and what we really
needed is something easier for the students, the teachers and the
technical staff. Octave is fine for the first two, but it's not for the
third.

I'll keep working on OfW, but I'll have to do it in my spare time.

Agustin

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 10:36:52 -0400
"Julian DeMarchi" <address@hidden> wrote:

> I wonder whether the real question isn't: "Who is officially hosting
> the Windows distro?"  By distro we need some release process because
> several people have made several flavours and to have an
> authoritative, latest and greatest version, someone needs to be the
> elected organiser.  My vote would be for John to be the gatekeeper
> with a small panel of those being active: Paul, Andy, Agustin, and
> anyone else who maintains the Windows distro.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John W. Eaton [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:28 AM
> To: Doug Stewart
> Cc: address@hidden; Priest, Jim
> Subject: Re: Octave for Windows
> 
> 
> On 10-Jul-2003, Doug Stewart <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> | With all due respect to the work that has been done by jwe, I think
> | Andy Adler's version is a little bit more user friendly.
> | (You can cut and paste from Octave window.)
> 
> Does that mean that there are changes to the version of Octave that
> Andy is distributing that are not in the current Octave sources?  If
> so, it would be useful if they were contributed.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jwe
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
> 
> Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
> How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
> Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
> 
> Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
> How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
> Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
> -------------------------------------------------------------




-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------