This covers the topic you mention, but from the perspective of the role of the R Core team. The point about Octave is a single sentence/footnote:
Fox, John. 2009. Aspects of the Social Organization and Trajectory of the R Project. The R Journal 1/2: 5-13. http://rjournal.github.io/archive/2009-2/RJournal_2009-2_Fox.pdf ------------------------------------- David L Carlson Department of Anthropology Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77840-4352 -----Original Message----- From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Federico Calboli Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 11:22 AM To: r-help Subject: [R] R vs octave development strategy (and success) Hi All, if memory serves me well I recall some paper comparing the relative success in getting mainstream acceptance (as mainstream as statistics can be) of both R and Octave. I remember vaguely that the fact the development strategies (core team vs one main developer) played a major role in the relative success of the two programs. I tried to find this paper, but my goggle skills are failing me. Would anyone know where to find it? Best F ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
