|
From: | soren |
Subject: | Re: Merging Octave and Octave-Forge? |
Date: | Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:53:30 +0200 |
User-agent: | Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.2-RC2) |
Quoting Thomas Weber <address@hidden>:
Am Dienstag, den 26.08.2008, 09:01 +0200 schrieb address@hidden:The problem with a wiki is that we have lots of auto-generated contents such as the function reference, the doxygen stuff, the manual (on octave.org), and similar. I'm not sure how well that would fit into a wiki.Simply let that stuff outside of the wiki and link to it. If it's autogenerated, there's no need for people to touch it.
Sure, we can do that, but then I don't get the point of having a wiki. My main points with the web site is simply: * I think it's confusing that we have two web sites. * It's more work to maintain two web sites than one.If the two web sites were merged by creating a wiki, then fine by me. I'm just advocating a merge, not a specific technical solution (although it is highly relevant to figure the technical stuff out).
>> * The Windows binary at Octave-Forge currently is the de-facto way >> of getting>> Octave on Windows. I really think this binary is a great feature, and I >> honestly think it should be hosted at octave.org, and be blessed as the>> semi-official way of getting Octave on Windows. I don't >> know/understand the >> Mac situation, as it seems many people are also using Fink. > > How is octave.org's bandwidth? SF, as bad/slow as it may be, has several > mirrors available. I think we have access to the GNU mirrors.Oh, I see that GNU hosts windows binaries. I didn't know that.
Okay, good point :-) But we could easily host the binaries on sourceforge and link directly to them from octave.org, couldn't we?
How do you update the documentation? I don't think you write it by hand, do you? It's probably part of the Makefile.
Well, you update the documentation by changing the texinfo help text in the specific function (either m-file or cc-file). Then we run a script that extracts all the help texts and generates a whole bunch of html pages. Fairly simple, but also quite time-consuming (it takes about half an hour on my machine to generate the function reference).
It shouldn't be a problem to trigger an update when a new package is uploaded.
In principle no, but it requires some server-side functionality, that might be hard to get (you need a fairly large build setup to create the web pages).
Søren
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |