From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7652 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2014 20:08:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7638 invoked by uid 89); 19 Jun 2014 20:08:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: ipmx6.colorado.edu Received: from ipmx6.colorado.edu (HELO ipmx6.colorado.edu) (128.138.128.246) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 20:08:29 +0000 From: Patrick Alken Received: from unknown (HELO [172.30.3.84]) ([213.173.227.110]) by smtp.colorado.edu with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 19 Jun 2014 14:08:28 -0600 Message-ID: <53A34339.7070608@colorado.edu> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 20:08:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gsl-discuss@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Next Version? References: <02E5613E-E5F7-4225-B8A9-11D71EEFD09E@phas.ubc.ca> In-Reply-To: <02E5613E-E5F7-4225-B8A9-11D71EEFD09E@phas.ubc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2014-q2/txt/msg00031.txt.bz2 On 06/19/2014 07:58 PM, Jean-François Caron wrote: > Hello, I am wondering if anyone has an update on when we might see the next version of GSL? Is it something like “in the next month”, “by the end of summer”, or “next year”? > > I don’t need any details, I’m just being impatient because my contribution is supposed to appear in the next version, and I wish to make a patch for CERN’s ROOT that will use the new feature. So just a short answer will be enough to satisfy me. = ) > > Jean-François > I've been completely swamped lately. The lapack/flame issue is still unresolved - I don't mind pushing this off to 3.0 in order to get 2.0 out more quickly. Gerard is working on a new memory management scheme which may take a while to complete - perhaps he would agree to wait until 3.0 to include that? I think those are the two main issues to resolve. If we can agree to postpone these features until 3.0, then 2.0 could be released fairly quickly...maybe within a month or two, though Rhys may have some other things in mind to work on. Patrick