Re: Octave Forge -- Looking for a new leader

[Sebastian Schöps]

Oliver Heimlich wrote
>>>>> I'd say that official packages must be carefully reviewed such that
>>>>> there
>>>>> is no malicious code and that the code is (mathematically) correctly
>>>>> working. I understand that Carnë checked formal correctness but not
>>>>> contentwise (Carnë: right?).
> 
> What do you mean by “(mathematically) correctly working”?

I meant the following: an OF leader cannot check the correctness of the
implementation of an algorithm in a package. He/she will almost certainly
lack the expertise since many most packages are rather specialised. One can
check if tests exists and pass but one cannot tell if they actually make
sense. 


Oliver Heimlich wrote
> Would you say that we can achieve peer reviewed package content?  Or is it
> just about
> checking whether enough tests exist and pass?

I mean the opposite. Since we will not be able to do rigorous reviews (as
for octave itself), we should only do minimal effort, i.e., spend less time
on "leading" and shifting more responsibility to the individual packages
maintainers. 

Sebastian



--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Octave-Forge-Looking-for-a-new-leader-tp4681121p4681306.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.