Re: Octave & QtOctave

[Kei Kebreau]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Kei Kebreau <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> address@hidden skribis:
>>>
>>>> names for packages are (mostly) random, although in some
>>>> cases following classiifcations (see python-*, r-*, ...).
>>>
>>> That randomness is very limited in practice, if I may.  :-)
>>>
>>>   https://gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Package-Naming.html
>>>
>>> “qtoctave” was added by Kei.  WDYT about the naming issue, Kei?
>>>
>>> Ludo’.
>>
>> I agree with ng0 that Octave and its GUI interface should be kept in
>> separate packages, as the difference in size is more than 5000 MiB.
>> I also agree that the GUI package should be named "octave", but I don't
>> know whether the CLI package should be named "octave-minimal" or
>> "octave-cli".  I find myself leaning toward "octave-cli" because the CLI
>> package does include some non-essential dependencies.
>
> Makes sense to me.  If others agree with this (“octave-cli” rather than
> “octave-minimal”), go ahead!
>
> Ludo’.

Sorry, the last message didn't include the earlier contributors to this
thread.

Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?

0001-gnu-Rename-octave-to-octave-cli.patch
Description: Text Data

0002-gnu-Rename-qtoctave-to-octave.patch
Description: Text Data