|Re: [eigen] Status of unsupported modules|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Status of unsupported modules
- From: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:09:18 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=rPCMWFi0SBzU0C2s3aWMkXyqj9GApponrggYsQAck7Y=; b=pXvjZr+nUZukOAo6j7ZsN9GIl2Y0qV4Am/BeHs6gedjp61VZqXCebBWCAJU2MRq/Ix Y+SsXeCk7jphQaHd1NoN8ivrjoFS/6qgWBX1tLN5086mG6OfQyy9P/TpnkAPI/k8kvG4 cQK54yewRi5DTLMA/OlYEJznvw/YIwxhQcjTY=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=WL3xYM1FQmiu8l0tA9ppr1gHwZXi5/cEDxB2fWbqBHuKvGaD3pPeDJZVtMi1tHPgwn lyzztOaJ7OxgydiphpVM4MUH+xNShE5ePJZPIDxvueOA+KTZy+WC9A6jPJTLlKw1g//x T4ZtMOW0aX6QWCvUcXxcZfahzPWBnxv3IjXos=
2009/11/10 Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi all,
> We now have 12 'unsupported' modules, and I think it's time to keep track of
> those in a slightly more formal way.
> I've added this page to the wiki (I think it belongs there rather than the
> doxygen documentation as it's a moving target and not reference information).
Thanks for doing this!
It would also be interesting to know which unsupported modules are
planning to be included in 3.0. And finally, i wonder if this should
be extended to modules developed in forks. After all, it should be
perfectly valid to keep a module in a fork, polish it there, and get
it merged directly as a supported module.
> I'll try to complete it as much as i can, but please add the information you
> can, especially concerning the 'contact' column.
Oh, perhaps you can let the respective authors do that. If a module
doesn't have a maintainer who reads this list, it is unlikely to ever
> Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>