Re: "Official" binary release for Windows

[John W. Eaton]

On 03/07/2014 07:10 PM, John Donoghue wrote:
> On 03/07/2014 06:08 PM, address@hidden wrote:
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:21:01 -0500
> > From: "John W. Eaton"<address@hidden>
> > To: octave maintainers mailing list<address@hidden>
> > Subject: "Official" binary release for Windows
> > Message-ID:<address@hidden>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >
> > I'd like to start making the Windows installer available from
> > ftp.gnu.org.  Is it ready for that now?  Or are there some significant
> > problems that need to be fixed before we should make "official" releases?
> >
> > jwe
>
> I havent had any issues recently with the build except with gcc.
>
> I had added a readme html file for the install that may want to be
> looked at / modified prior to distribution, depending on what is
> distributed or not.
>
> Would it also make sense to list in it all the packages that are known
> to work and compile in windows ?

Sure.

Is there any good reason that openblas should not be used by default?

Are there any significant issues remaining?  Is it time to make the 
3.8.1 binary available?

jwe