--- James Amundson <amundson@fnal.gov> wrote:
> No. It isn't very clear. I mean fix up the spaghetti that I created
> to invoke the maxima lisp image with command line arguments. It's the
> code that includes the maxima-run-lisp script. It's also the code
that
> is worthless on Windows. I wrote it; I doubt anyone else understands
> it. I have in mind a new system that will work on both Unix and
> Windows. It should also be easier to extend for new lisps.
Ah, gotcha. Sounds good.
> New code for talking to external interfaces like TeXmacs is another
> issue. We can consider that for the next release.
To my woefully underpowered mind, if we handle this step now it might
encourage the TeXmacs folks and anyone else interested to begin working
on improved Maxima support in their own programs now rather than later,
and thus result in more exposure/interest. Of course if we aren't
ready then we can file it for later.
> Did I make it clear that the 5.9.0 release should fix the problem
> TeXmacs was having with plotting? That information may have been
> buried. It's a TeXmacs bug, but I worked around it.
I recall you mentioning it, but I don't recall if it was part of the
release notes.
> > > 3) The future plans are certainly open for debate.
> >
> > Look pretty good. Oh, did you want to comment on our big share
> > package discussion we had a day or two back?
>
> I haven't read it. Honestly, I have 384 unread mail messages in my
> maxima folder. All I've done is scan them to see if they have any
> pressing issues for the release. (Did I mention that the release took
> a lot longer than I thought?) I will try to read that thread soon.
Ah. That would be a problem :-). No hurry.
> > Now we can add in the bug fixes that folks have been maintaining in
> > separate copies. :-)
>
> Maxima was frozen much longer than it should have been. We will try
> to avoid ever freezing for so long again.
Well, hopefully we won't have to. With the Windows and Linux platforms
both running smoothly now, and that fantastic new build process, things
should progress more easily. 5.9.0 was a seminal release, a quantum
leap beyond 5.6.1. I can see the actual final 6.0 release being frozen
for a while, but I propose at that point we fork the cvs into a 6.0
stable branch and a development branch, so we can harden the stable
branch without leaving new features and major changes in the lurch.
CY
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com