Online Developer Meeting (2021-05-25)

From Octave
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Todays topics[edit]

  • Meet and greet 5 minutes before meeting (audio testing).


  • General question about the acceptance.
    • We like it.
  • Continue to no longer actively advertise the mailing-lists.

Octave 6.3.0[edit]

Octave releases[edit]

  • Keep the current versioning scheme
  • Only one major release per year.
    • Should include new features.
    • Developer time is limited, more not doable.
    • More frequent minor releases, not 100% perfect, promise to try to keep API/ABI compatibility.
  • Better error than crash on API/ABI changes.
    • It seems this problem occurred with development versions of Octave.
      • No mercy for developers: they hopefully know what they are doing, have to cope with breaking changes.
      • Normally the API version of oct files is checked, thus it should not have crashed and rather have warned.
      • Contrary with development version, even after breaking changes, the API is only incremented once for the release. This might have caused the trouble.
  • Octave on MS Windows, Linux, macOS usually has somehow a compiler available (unlike Matlab on MS Windows), thus recompiling the oct files is annoying, but possible.

GitHub Actions[edit]

QScintilla signal/slot problem[edit]

  • Bug #60469
  • On MS Windows only for QScintilla the "safer" signal/slot changes seem to not work.
    • Revert it until the problem is identified.

Previous topics[edit]

The following items were not discussed. Just some links to progress on those items are displayed.

MXE Octave branches[edit]

  • Which changes should go on which branch?
    • "default": everything new
    • "release": conservative updates



  • Markus added a folder ".github" to the Octave main repo?
    • How are the experiences so far? 😉

String class strategy[edit]


  • Wish to define classdef classes from C++ "nicely" (currently only from m-files comfortable usable).
  • This would also help implementing the string class.


General consensus was to stay with C++11 until a "killer application" shows up that justifies changing to a newer standard.

Ideas for next meeting[edit]

See also[edit]