On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:59:31PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes: > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:01:33PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: > >> Like below? And how could I then access qscintilla-for-octave from > >> maths.scm if it isn't defined publicly? > > > > Yes, that looks right. But I would put qscintilla-for-octave in > > maths.scm to avoid the issue you describe. > > So would you say that this is clean enough that I could push both of > these changes in their respecitive files before modifying the Octave > definition?
I would wait to push the Qt 4 variant until you have made sure it works with Octave. Also, I didn't notice a difference between the arguments for each package variant. If there is no difference, could the Qt 4 variant inherit the arguments, too?
