Re: [Quantlib-dev] 0.3.5 preview

[Dirk E. <ed...@de...>]

On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 07:33:37PM +0200, Ferdinando Ametrano wrote:
> Hi Dirk
> 
> >If we list / ship the binary rpms, should we ship debs too?

s/binaries/pre-built packages/

I didn't mean binaries in the sense of /usr/bin, I meant .rpm 'binary
packages' as opposed to source tarballs. Sorry for mixing lingo. that really
was not clear.

That said, I think my point still applies. Either we ship 'source only'
(with a possible exception for win, and maybe os x), or we ship source as
well as prebuilt. As you seem to have opted for choice two, I personally
would find it natural to give Debian the same shelf space as you allocated
to RH/FC.  

Dirk


> I wouldn't ship QuantLib binaries, QuantLib developers are supposed to be 
> able to build QuantLib  (and hopefully able to build and run the associated 
> test-suite)
> 
> I would ship QuantLib-Python, QuantLib-Ruby, etc binaries, since users of 
> those packages are not required to build them.
> 
> This is what should be available on quantlib.org/nextrelease.html
> 
> Is it OK?
> 
> ciao -- Nando 
> 
> 

-- 
The relationship between the computed price and reality is as yet unknown.  
                                             -- From the pac(8) manual page