On 02/11/2017 23:28, Julien Puydt wrote: > >>> - who's working on packaging 6.0.0? >> Nobody afaik. It should not be too hard as it is mostly the core which >> has beeen >> translated from Fortran to C++ > Strange idea : I thought fortran was still faster. As always it depends. The parser/lexer/execution was coded in Fortran. Nobody was able to maintain the core anymore (for a while), preventing languages changes, bug fixes in the interpreter, etc... This is why this was redevelopped in C++. Anyway, most of the time, when you perform computation, most of the time is spent in the various functions, not really on the language steps. In some cases, it will be a bit slower. The tradeoff was in favor of C++ here.
>>> - is it normal that a package under the Debian Science Team umbrella >>> still uses svn? >> I don't see that as a blocker but don't hesitate to migrate it to hg or git. > That means removing the current git repository and then either finding > the script used to move the svn repositories to git during the migration > (keeping the whole history), or using "gbp import-dsc" (or better: gbp > import-dscs) (keeping a partial history). I don't think we care enough about the history of the package. http://snapshot.debian.org/ should be enough. > >>> and the final one: >>> >>> - how can I help? >> Trying to upload v6 should be fine. >> >> I can help as I wrote the upstream build system and the debian packages! > I'm currently having a look at how much the existing patches have to be > changed for 6.0.0. In fact, I'm surprised there are so much of them: why > aren't they upstream? Different versions, because the 5 branch is no longer maintained, because I am lazy, etc. > The fact that git.scilab.org and bugzilla.scilab.org aren't available > doesn't help :-/ > I have a mirror here: https://github.com/opencollab/scilab Anyway, if you drop the ball on this, please tell me. I will see what I can do! S
