And David Bremner writes:
The question I was trying ask is how broad the pkg-scicomp
groups sees its mandate.
Scientific computing as a whole is sucking in combinatorial
work as quickly as possible. There are mountains of potential
uses in general data analysis, biological systems simulation,
On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 21:29 +0100, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
Le lundi 28 janvier 2008 à 15:13 -0500, Ross Boylan a écrit :
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 06:38 +0100, Christophe Prud'homme wrote:
in my opinion the scope is quite broad : it spans the sciences of
computing,
So pkg-scicomp should
I would approach the question of a team by asking what values we have
as Debian science developers. I have already seen Andreas
representing consistency and attention to detail, and I would agree
that we should display these if we have a new team. I have some other
aesthetics too:
When I first
Raphael == Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Raphael On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
I really don't mind giving up the idea of pkg-science (Raphael
already created the project and the svn... Sorry for this).
Raphael Once decided, please don't forget to
David,
Before we kill pkg-science, are people ok with pkg-scicomp including
e.g. graph theory? I.e. stuff outside the normal numerical idea
that some people have about scientific computing? I certainly don't
mind, but when I hear scientific computing, I think of numerics.
I guess you are
[ I originally sent this by mistake to Christophe only, sorry about
the extra noise]
Before we kill pkg-science, are people ok with pkg-scicomp
including e.g. graph theory? I.e. stuff outside the normal
numerical idea that some people have about scientific
computing? I
David,
in my opinion the scope is quite broad : it spans the sciences of
computing,
So pkg-scicomp should definitely not host all possible science packages.
I stepped up for opencascade/salomé/code aster because I think they fit in
(netgen and gmsh which are part of pkg-scicomp have connections
On 24 January 2008 at 22:02, Christophe Prud'homme wrote:
| The policy is not to include the sources, just the diff. Would that be ok ?
| We use svn-buildpackage but that is not mandatory
Same for us at pkg-openmpi. I wasn't the one setting this up, but as the
default 'sponsor and uploader' I
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 09:54 -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 23:23 +0100, Frederic Lehobey wrote:
[snip]
By the way, as I am extremely busy these days I had not time to
answer to Adam Powell but I wish to congratulate him for his
impressive work on packaging
Hello,
After a few discussions with Raphael and Adam, I would like to propose
to create a pkg-science on alioth in order to create a dynamic around
scientific software packaging.
Adam created a package of Opencascade. To simplify the maintenance of
this package and to create of future packages
Hello,
On Thursday 24 January 2008 17:38:13 Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
After a few discussions with Raphael and Adam, I would like to propose
to create a pkg-science on alioth in order to create a dynamic around
scientific software packaging.
Adam created a package of Opencascade. To simplify the
[ Thursday 24 January 2008 ]
| Hello,
|
| After a few discussions with Raphael and Adam, I would like to propose
| to create a pkg-science on alioth in order to create a dynamic around
| scientific software packaging.
| Adam created a package of Opencascade. To simplify the maintenance of
| this
[ Thursday 24 January 2008 ]
| Le jeudi 24 janvier 2008 à 20:31 +0100, Christophe Prud'homme a écrit :
| [ Thursday 24 January 2008 ]
|
| | Hello,
| |
| | After a few discussions with Raphael and Adam, I would like to propose
| | to create a pkg-science on alioth in order to create a dynamic
13 matches
Mail list logo
