On 2007-09-25 18:11+0100 Andrew Ross wrote: > > Sorry for my silence over the last couple of weeks, but I've been snowed > under at work.
No problem. I have a lot of calls on my time as well at the moment which is why my current PLplot contributions are limited to extremely short projects (such as testing changes done by others) that I can just squeeze in. > > Plplot works fine with all 2.1.xx versions of octave I have tried. It > certainly works fine with 2.1.73 on Ubuntu feisty. According to http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/download.html, 2.1.73 is now considered to be the stable version of octave with no further changes contemplated in the 2.1.x series so I am really glad that you have confirmed our current octave bindings work for that case. > It does not work on > octave 2.9.x. I've tried 2.9.9 on Ubuntu feisty. This is a different > version to that tested by other users. More worryingly I seem to have > different errors to other reports on the list. Various things seem to > have changed which will require rewriting some of the octave parts of > the bindings. I have been pondering the best way of doing this in a > compatible manner. It might be cleanest to have different versions of the > bindings depending on the octave version. I am sure I can sort this, but > I'm not sure of the timeframe. It's personally important to me, so I > will try to devote some time to it. Well, from the URL above the octave testing version has the remark "(you probably want this)". So I suggest you designate our current interface (which we know works for 2.1.73) as the "octave stable interface" and create a modified octave interface called our "octave testing interface" that works for the octave testing version (currently 2.9.14). Hopefully, that version won't change too often, and there will be no changes required to our octave testing interface when there is a change in the version number designated as octave testing. Of course this strategy means our octave testing interface _might_ not work for early 2.9.x versions that are in distributions (e.g., 2.9.9 in Ubuntu feisty). If that turns out to be the case, you can cover that off by disabling the octave testing interface unless exactly the right version that you have tested has been installed (usually by specifically downloading and building it for those who want to be on the absolute cutting edge). This strategy should take care of cutting edge octave users but not interfere with access to PLplot for octave since presumably every recent distro will have packages for octave stable = 2.1.73. However, an octave testing interface would be nice to have as well since it will gradually lead to an octave 3.0 interface for us when the 2.9.x series finally converges to 3.0. > There is also a psttf.c issue Alan reported to me recently which I would > like to look into before the release. Apparently from your commit message remarks you have now fixed the positioning issue. Thanks. Also, you do not confirm the segfault issue I found (which may simply mean my pango stack made from source downloads and builds does not include some key fixes that are in the distro versions or has some incompatible libraries in the stack). So I think we should ignore the segfault issue unless it shows up again when I update my system (probably still at least another month from now) from Debian oldstable to testing. > [out of order] How long are we looking at until the > release? That's the big question. This morning I finished up the desired changes in the files that create the website examples, but those rather extensive changes still have to be tested by Hazen to make sure good-looking results are produced on his platform. All the other issues I mentioned are fixed, put off until after 5.8.0, or in the "would be nice" category (e.g., more Ada examples). I believe the octave testing interface is probably in the "would be nice" category as well because of the current octave stable interface that will work as a good alternative. Therefore, here is what I suggest with regard to the release timing. Hazen, once you have confirmed my recent changes produce good-looking web site examples why don't you go ahead and set a release date for 5.8.0-RC1 that is the earliest that is convenient for you (say this weekend or the next). Then if Jerry can come through with more Ada examples or Andrew can put together the proposed octave testing interface before that release date, then fine, but otherwise those issues can be dealt with after the release of 5.8.0. (I am assuming here that only minimal differences will be allowed between 5.8.0-RC1 and the 5.8.0. Ideally, those differences will be just the version number changes. However, if some showstopper bug was found in the week or so of testing from our users for 5.8.0-RC1, then obviously that fix should go into 5.8.0 as well.) Alan __________________________ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.org); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __________________________ Linux-powered Science __________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Plplot-devel mailing list Plplot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plplot-devel