Sounds very good to me.
James Amundson <amundson@fnal.gov> writes:
> OK, more has happened since release candidate 1 than I anticipated. In
> particular, much has been accomplished on the Windows and Xmaxima
> fronts. Although this is a still only a development release, I now think
> it is in everyone's best interest that we release windows binaries with
> or soon after the official 5.9.0 release. It should at the very least
> help avoid a deluge of "how do I get this thing to build under windows?"
> questions. As long as we are at it, I've decided to finish the Linux
> rpms at the same time.
>
> Here is what I think the criteria should be for release candidate 2:
>
> 1) Show-stopping bugs in rc1 fixed.
> -Done, or nearly so. The worrying thing lately is with the
> socket problems recently observed under windows. I would really like to
> hear if the same problem appears using clisp. Is anyone doing windows
> builds with clisp?
>
> 2) Camm's alternative gcl linking procedure added.
> -Mostly done. Needs more (some!) testing.
>
> 3) Binary packages for RedHat Linux (and other rpm-based distributions)
> and Windows.
> -Linux: Nearly done. (Sample packages are building as I speak.)
> -Windows: Great progress has been made. I hope we will have
> solid packages soon.
>
> 4) Xmaxima stabilized.
> -I'm told we are very close. The problem with spaces is not yet
> fixed. I hope it will be, but I don't think it should be a showstopper
> if it drags on much longer.
>
> Any thoughts on these criteria will be appreciated.
>
> --Jim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima@www.math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>
>
--
-- Stephe