Kei Kebreau writes:
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Kei Kebreau writes:
>>
>>> Alex Vong writes:
>>>
Kei Kebreau writes:
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Hello Kei,
>>
>> Kei Kebreau writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> Here are two tentative patches that make the chan
Alex Vong writes:
> Kei Kebreau writes:
>
>> Alex Vong writes:
>>
>>> Kei Kebreau writes:
>>>
Alex Vong writes:
> Hello Kei,
>
> Kei Kebreau writes:
>
> [...]
>>
>> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
>> Also, should
Kei Kebreau writes:
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Kei Kebreau writes:
>>
>>> Alex Vong writes:
>>>
Hello Kei,
Kei Kebreau writes:
[...]
>
> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
> Also, should we make a deprecated-package definit
Alex Vong writes:
> Kei Kebreau writes:
>
>> Alex Vong writes:
>>
>>> Hello Kei,
>>>
>>> Kei Kebreau writes:
>>>
>>> [...]
Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?
>>>
>>> I think som
Kei Kebreau writes:
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Hello Kei,
>>
>> Kei Kebreau writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
>>> Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?
>>
>> I think some additional changes related to "(a
Alex Vong writes:
> Hello Kei,
>
> Kei Kebreau writes:
>
> [...]
>>
>> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
>> Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?
>
> I think some additional changes related to "(assoc-ref inputs ..."
> needed to be
Hello Kei,
Kei Kebreau writes:
[...]
>
> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
> Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?
I think some additional changes related to "(assoc-ref inputs ..."
needed to be made. Otherwise, looks good to me!
swedebugia writes:
> On 2018-12-02 20:28, Kei Kebreau wrote:
> snip
>
>> Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
>
> Nice
>
>> Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?
>
> Yes, that sounds like a good idea to me.
Here's the new second patch
On 2018-12-02 20:28, Kei Kebreau wrote:
snip
Here are two tentative patches that make the changes we've discussed.
Nice
Also, should we make a deprecated-package definition for qtoctave?
Yes, that sounds like a good idea to me.
--
Cheers
Swedebugia
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Kei Kebreau skribis:
>
>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> n...@n0.is skribis:
>>>
names for packages are (mostly) random, although in some
cases following classiifcations (see python-*, r-*, ...).
>>>
>>> That randomn
swedebugia writes:
> On 2018-11-28 11:47, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Kei Kebreau skribis:
> snip
>
>>>
>>> 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 n
On 2018-11-28 11:47, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Kei Kebreau skribis:
snip
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
Kei Kebreau skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> n...@n0.is 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. :-)
>>
>>
Hello all,
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Hello,
>
> n...@n0.is 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/softw
Hello,
n...@n0.is 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 a
Alex Vong writes:
> n...@n0.is writes:
>
>> names for packages are (mostly) random, although in some
>> cases following classiifcations (see python-*, r-*, ...).
>>
> I am thinking that should we rename qtoctave to octave and octave to
> octave-cli (or octave-minimal)?
>
> Firstly, a new user wa
n...@n0.is writes:
> names for packages are (mostly) random, although in some
> cases following classiifcations (see python-*, r-*, ...).
>
I am thinking that should we rename qtoctave to octave and octave to
octave-cli (or octave-minimal)?
Firstly, a new user wanting to install octave will proba
names for packages are (mostly) random, although in some
cases following classiifcations (see python-*, r-*, ...).
The Qt part of Octave is a separate package because making
it just an output would still pull in Qt and the size difference
is huge.
Alex Vong transcribed 856 bytes:
> Hello,
>
> Br
Hello,
Brett Gilio writes:
> Hey all,
>
> Happy guix birthday!
>
> Quick question, why is the octave package split up into two different
> public definitions, rather than just having the QtOctave-GUI being a
> "gui" output, like it is for transmissionBT and some others?
>
I would also want to kn
19 matches
Mail list logo
