Where is the "like" button when you need it?
Joris Meys wrote:
> 2011/11/18 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso:
>
>> I don't see how MOSEK is making free software stronger. It's not
>> encouraging the usage of more free software. It's encouraging the use
>> of MOSEK. MOSEK should not be endorsed by an or
First of all, hi everyone! I'm new here and hope that this is the right way to
post bug reports. Otherwise, please inform me how to do it.
Now, I installed octclip to find intersections between polygons and found an
odd behaviour when sections of different polygons follow the same line. Also,
S
2011/11/18 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso :
>
> I don't see how MOSEK is making free software stronger. It's not
> encouraging the usage of more free software. It's encouraging the use
> of MOSEK. MOSEK should not be endorsed by an organisation that is
> supposed to promote free software.
>
> If these rea
2011/11/18 Martin Helm :
> Am 18.11.2011 21:11, schrieb Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso:
>> Please accept my apology again if I have upset you personally. I would
>> like to make amends and not make you feel like I am the only one who
>> is correct. - Jordi G. H.
> I am sorry, let us keep it civilized with
Am 18.11.2011 21:11, schrieb Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso:
> Please accept my apology again if I have upset you personally. I would
> like to make amends and not make you feel like I am the only one who
> is correct. - Jordi G. H.
I am sorry, let us keep it civilized with that I also address myself, I
2011/11/18 Martin Helm :
> Am 18.11.2011 20:39, schrieb Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso:
>> You really don't think that license managers, software patents, NDAs,
>> non-competition agreements, hidden source code, secret algorithms, and
>> forbidding your users from doing whatever they want with the softwar
On 18 November 2011 19:14, Robert T. Short
wrote:
> Martin's point makes a lot of sense. However, I still don't see the
> problem with hosting non-free software in the forge project.
The problem is that when a new version of such package is released,
someone need to upload it to the server. The
Am 18.11.2011 20:39, schrieb Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso:
> You really don't think that license managers, software patents, NDAs,
> non-competition agreements, hidden source code, secret algorithms, and
> forbidding your users from doing whatever they want with the software
> is at all bad? That's what
On 18 November 2011 14:14, Robert T. Short
wrote:
> Martin's point makes a lot of sense. However, I still don't see the
> problem with hosting non-free software in the forge project.
>
> Personally, I think the notion that non-free software is somehow bad is
> ludicrous.
You really don't think t
Martin's point makes a lot of sense. However, I still don't see the
problem with hosting non-free software in the forge project.
Personally, I think the notion that non-free software is somehow bad is
ludicrous. Freedom means allowing different points of view and
different philosophies to coe
El 17/11/2011, a las 16:40, c. escribió:On 17 Nov 2011, at 11:51, Miguel Rubio-Roy wrote:For example, inhttp://octave.sourceforge.net/signal/function/medfilt1.htmlshould be indicated that this function is in the signal package.Sounds, like a good suggestion!The function documentation pages are gene
On Nov 18, 2011, at 12:00 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> I'm sorry about the tone of my previous email. Let me try again in a
> cleaner way.
>
> The problem is: R or the organisation behind R via its infrastructure
> seems to be endorsing R-Forge, and R-Forge is hosting at least one
> proj
Jordi,
I think you are misunderstanding a few things here. First, "R" doesn't endorse
anything - it is a program, it does what you tell it to do. Second, whoever
runs R-forge doesn't endorse the packages hosted on it, either. It's just an
infrastructure, with no claim about endorsement of the p
Am 18.11.2011 18:51, schrieb Robert T. Short:
> I understand that. If it isn't available from the website, at the
> very least it creates an obstacle to using it, and therefore is a
> suppression of freedom. A nonfree (sub)repository is a perfect
> place to give users access to stuff that may be us
On 18 November 2011 12:51, Robert T. Short
wrote:
> I understand that. If it isn't available from the website, at the very
> least it creates an obstacle to using it, and therefore is a suppression
> of freedom.
That obstacle is meant to discourage the creator of the non-free
software and to enc
I'm sorry about the tone of my previous email. Let me try again in a
cleaner way.
The problem is: R or the organisation behind R via its infrastructure
seems to be endorsing R-Forge, and R-Forge is hosting at least one
project whose sole purpose is to link R with non-free software. This
looks like
I understand that. If it isn't available from the website, at the very
least it creates an obstacle to using it, and therefore is a suppression
of freedom. A nonfree (sub)repository is a perfect place to give users
access to stuff that may be useful even though it doesn't meet the
standards o
2011/11/18 Simon Urbanek :
> I think you are misunderstanding a few things here. First, "R"
> doesn't endorse anything - it is a program,
It is also an organisation and that organisation has a website.
Someone is responsible for the contents of that website and the views
espoused in it. Saying tha
Hello Martin,
Martin Hoeijmakers wrote:
> Hi Philip,
>
> Looking at you name, I think you are dutch speaking.
Yep that's my native tongue.
I'll proceed in English and I added octdev mailing list so others can
follow.
> I am using oct2xls for a while with only three arguments. Now, I get the
>
2011/11/17 Juan Pablo Carbajal :
> Octave 3.4.3, financial 0.3.2
> octave:2> rate(30, 510.19, 1)
> error: @pv (x, 30, 510.19, 0, "e") - 1: no function and no method found
> error: called from:
> error: /usr/local/share/octave/3.4.3-rc0/m/optimization/fsolve.m at
> line 149, column 9
> err
On 18 Nov 2011, at 13:55, c. wrote:
>
> On 18 Nov 2011, at 00:00, Miguel Rubio-Roy wrote:
>
>> Let's see... Is there a function to get the package name of a certain
>> function?
>> miguel
>
> You don't need that because you run generate_package_html on one package at a
> time.
> so whene you
On 18 Nov 2011, at 00:00, Miguel Rubio-Roy wrote:
> Let's see... Is there a function to get the package name of a certain
> function?
> miguel
You don't need that because you run generate_package_html on one package at a
time.
so whene you are launching generate_package_html you do know the na
On 17 November 2011 23:00, Miguel Rubio-Roy wrote:
> Let's see... Is there a function to get the package name of a certain
> function?
>
> miguel
Help output will show you the directory, which is the package. You do
have to know to look for this. I am not sure it is worth being more
explicit. In
Let's see... Is there a function to get the package name of a certain function?
miguel
El 17/11/2011, a las 16:40, c. escribió:
>
> On 17 Nov 2011, at 11:51, Miguel Rubio-Roy wrote:
>
>> I don't know if this is the appropriate place to ask for this, but it would
>> be quite helpful that the w
24 matches
Mail list logo
