Re: ada lapack

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

"Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> writes:

> On 8/19/2012 8:02 AM, Simon Wright wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm not promising _anything_, but personally I'd find it easier to do
>> this if the source was on Sourceforge in some version control system. My
>> vote would be, in descending order of preference,
>>
>> Mercurial (Hg)
>> git
>>
>> and, trailing by a long way,
>>
>> Subversion (svn)
>>
>> (SF isn't supporting CVS any more for new projects, a Good Thing).
>>
>
> Simon, yes ofcourse, Ada Lapack and Ada Blas bindings should be
> in source control somewhere so that any one can make changes and
> improvements to the same source.

What I meant was that the SF project that Leo has already set up for
Ada_Lapack would be even better if it had the source code in source
control, rather than just as an archive. If I was enrolled as a
developer on the project I could do that, if Leo wanted. SF username
simonjwright.

> I can make a sourceForge project for it now and put the Lapack
> and Blas sources there, which are based on the original ones
> (BLAS Ada binding written by Duncan Sands and the LAPACK Ada
> binding written by Wasu Chaopanon).
>
> I will use the current snapshot I have here
>
> http://12000.org/my_notes/ada/lapack_and_blas/index.htm
>
> where I just added documentation and moved the packages into
> one package, and cleaned up the build makefiles and no code changes
> was done in the actual binding itself.
>
> I do not know how to use the source control you mention above
> (actually I do not know how to make a sourceForge project, but
> will find out. Before someone took my c2Ada updates and they
> put it in sourceForge for me.)
>
> If you prefer to do that, since you seem to know these things
> much better than me, please do so. If you are busy, I'll figure
> it out and put the above sources into sourceForge and make
> an Ada Lapack and Ada Blas projects there. and post a link
> to it here.

I think I agree with you that your work ought to be in a different SF
project. Or projects, whichever you think best (though I'd go for one).
I'd be quite happy to organise this.

Perhaps we should take any further organisational details to e-mail and
come back to the group when done?