Re: [OctDev] license.m

[Paul K. <pki...@us...>]

On Nov 28, 2005, at 10:49 AM, William Poetra Yoga Hadisoeseno wrote:

> On 11/28/05, Paul Kienzle <pki...@us...> wrote:
>>
>> The alternative is to build infrastructure so that octave-forge
>> doesn't shadow any octave functions unless we tell it to
>> in the build/install scripts.  If anyone wants to tackle
>> this, keep in mind that we want to support testing before
>> installation, which means installing all the files we want
>> to keep into a temporary build directory.  I think
>> converting each subdirectory to support S=F8ren's packaging
>> system (extended as necessary) is the best way to go.
>>
>
> Yes, I think this is good, because we wouldn't need to worry about old
> octave-forge functions shadowing new octave functions. I think a
> script can do this, and it can also help us when we want to check for
> (and remove) obsolete functions in octave-forge.
>
> I've heard about this packaging system before, but I haven't checked
> it out yet. Maybe you can put a temporary "freeze" on the cvs
> repository, checkout the latest version, make the changes, empty the
> repository, then upload the new files?

No freeze required, just create a branch for for 2.1.x support.

Also, no need to delete and reinsert since it will just be
adding packaging info. I don't want to lose the file change history.

- Paul