* James Van Zandt <jim.vanza...@gmail.com> [2018-11-24 18:03]:
I don't see why a Readme.DEBIAN file in each package would be
difficult to manage. If needed, it could be generic, with the
same text in each package, such as:
By default installed packages are not available from the Octave
prompt. The functions from this package can be added to the Octave
path by typing
pkg load <package name>
at the Octave command line.
It is not a matter of *difficulty*, but a matter of *maintainability*.
Currently in Debian, there are over 60 Octave-Forge packages [1] and all
of tehm would be impacted by the change. We, the developers of the DOG,
do such distribution-wide changes only when it is extremely necessary.
At any rate, We have already changed the README.Debian file of the octave
package [2]. We hope that it is enough, for now.
[1] https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?email=team%2Bpkg-octave-team%40tracker.debian.org
[2] https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-octave-team/octave/commit/987627f214beabe6cc20df19227d4b960ac7ee3a
I note a discussion of autoloading packages here:
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/package-autoload-td4676287.html
particularly a comment by LachlanA;
My personal belief is that the __unimplemented__ function, which
currently tells us which package we should load, should just load
the package and continue (unless the same function is implemented
in multiple packages, in which case it should list all of those
packages and give an error).
That would most closely emulate the Matlab experience, while
avoiding the problems Carnë described.
I would appreciate that. However, I'd be satisfied if the
__unimplemented__ function simply knew about all the functions available in
packages. (Currently it doesn't - the subject of another bug).
This is an upstream issue. Whatever default behavior the upstream
authors decide to adopt, the DOG will follow.
Best,
Rafael
