On Mar 25, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > On 03/25/2012 09:44 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote: >> On 23 March 2012 19:02, Robert T. Short<oct...@phaselockedsystems.com> >> wrote: >>> All Jordi was trying to say (I think) was that if we are going to do it, >>> then we need to quit fussing about the interface, pick a concept that >>> works, and get on with it. That makes sense. >> >> Yep. This is exactly it. We have evidence of a concept that seems to >> work. Look for reviews of GUI Octave online. Other than problems >> because of the way it's built, people seem to universally praise it. I >> have even heard people praise it more than Matlab's own interface, >> which is why I think we should just replicate it. > > What features does it have? What features do people think an IDE should > have? > > >> Furthermore, Daniel, regarding GUI Octave and its prerogative to keep >> itself closed, I'm not convinced that's true. From where I'm standing, >> it looks like derivative work based on Octave, thus a GPL violation. > > It boils down to a legal question (meaning a judge would have to > interpret), but to me GUI Octave looks like aggregate work. It > communicates with Octave but is not linked with Octave in terms of > binaries nor execution space. I assume neither does it restrict the use > of Octave in any way; that is, if GUI Octave (once installed on a > computer) prevented a user from running Octave in any way but through > its interface, that would be a violation of the Octave GPL license. > > The only possible infringement I see is the name, and that would be > John's call or possibly anyone else from long ago who conceived the name > Octave or anyone those having ownership may have assigned naming rights to. > > >> I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not sure of this, but I sure don't like >> non-free stuff built on top of Octave. We gave the guy Octave, and he >> won't give us back his GUI. > > Why is that a problem? That would be restricting the use of the Octave > software. > > >> So, let's make the best of it and just >> take his design back, since that seems to be the part that he gave us. > > I think if Octave developers want to put effort into an IDE the best > approach is to start with deciding what features it should have and go > from there. > > Dan > > > > >> >> - Jordi G. H. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> This SF email is sponsosred by: >> Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure >> _______________________________________________ >> Octave-dev mailing list >> Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev > > -- > > Dan Sebald > email: daniel(DOT)sebald(AT)ieee(DOT)org > URL: http://www(DOT)dansebald(DOT)com >
What is the status of octclipse? Isn't this a GPL compliant project? Doesn't it give a starting point? I don't know because I do most of my development on a Mac and from what I understand octclipse only works on Linux. Frank Willett
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
_______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
