Re: GSL in octave

[Susi Lehtola]

On 07/19/2016 01:43 PM, Julien Bect wrote:
> Most, really.  I haven't pushed (yet) a few minor things:
>  * your changes to DESCRIPTION -> we'll change that when release approaches
>  * your changes to the test files (loading package at the begining) ->
> shouldn't we turn them into real unit tests?

I have now added some trivial tests that check all of the generated 
templates, doing which made me catch one final bug.

>  * changes to the cleaning rule in Makefile -> I'll look into this
> later, perhaps should we call src/Makefile clean recursively?

Possibly.

> Since my previous email, I have pushed all your recent changesets and
> added a few of my own.
>
> I again had to fold some of your changesets for clarity.  When you have
> several consecutive changesets that address the same logical change
> (typically, you realize that you forgot to commit something, or you
> discover that you made a typo) please don't leave them like them.
> Instead, fold them using hg's mq extension.  Of course, you have to do
> that *before* you push to the public repo (i.e., the changesets must be
> in "draft" phase).

Well, I guess I'm used to project specific repos, whereas your policies 
seem to stem from octave-forge being managed as one huge consolidation. 
It's also a bit confusing having to work on different version control 
systems and try to learn each of their quirks. I thought pull requests 
might result in just a single commit message.

If you like, I can always dump the changes into a clean repo...

> It seems that there is something wrong with your latest changes to
> legendre_sphPlm_array.cc (see log below).

That's been fixed as well.
--
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
address@hidden