root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > For me personally, autoconf support is more important than | > almost everything else, the reason being that I would really | > like to see more Axiom developers. The more standard our build | > environment is, the easier that will be. Seconly increasing | > the number of type of supported platforms is very important | > for increasing the number of Axiom users. | > | > So I am especially interested in what I labelled Gold (52) | > above, but I can live with the experimental branch until | > then. | | I realize that autoconf is your golden standard and you know I believe | that it won't have a measureable effect on the number of developers.
I don't know. What I know for sure is that I have five students who all have hard time with Axiom silver and I had to give them axiom.build-improvements. One group is working on formal power series, and the other is working on algorithmic differentiation. | I do think the build-improvements branch has a positive effect by | making people believe they can change the system. Unfortunately | changing Axiom is easy but showing that you didn't break anything is | hard. A lot of my changes are not posted because there are many | things to check. Though I have a lot of experience with Axiom I | cannot answer Gaby's questions without study and experiment. I don't | think autoconf is going to change that. It most certainly is not going to answer those questions, but I believe it would lower the entry barrier to building Axiom (and possibly modifying it). And that is a Good Thing. -- Gaby _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer