Re: [gentoo-soc] Interest in Improve packaging of scientific software

[Benda Xu <heroxbd@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1693 bytes --]

Hi Andrew,

Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> writes:

>> I’ll then start the most challenge part, porting and packaging
>> Intel Tools.
>
> While Intel stuff may rightfully be a part of your project, I do not
> recommend to focus on them too much, since this is a proprietary
> software and GSoC is all about Free/Libre software.
>
>> I’m also interested to port Intel’s python distribution
>
> I've discussed this project with Intel devs on one of the
> conferences. There is nothing special about it: it is a normal
> Python linked with Intel libraries and with some math libs replaced
> with more optimized free software solutions. So everyone can do the
> same with Intel MKL without need to obtain Intel Python. They
> created this project mostly due to marketing issues, since python
> is a popular language and management want to establish Intel's
> presence in this area.
>
> If you want to pursue this task, I recommend to build on FLOSS
> solutions as described above, packaging Intel Python itself is
> quite useless.

+1

With a more rubost blas/lapack framework/eclass, an optimized
scipy/numpy linked with OpenBLAS or Intel MKL will be on par if not
overtake the Intel python binaries.

>> I’d like if it is possible to bring into the sci-gentoo overlay
>> an “official” matlab ebuild
>
> Devoting a whole month to the proprietary piece of software is
> questionable again. Devoting some time to improve
> proprietary software packaging in Gentoo is OK, but devoting half of
> your time for them is questionable at least.

+1

I don't think a gigantic piece of proprietary software is very
interesting to us.

Benda

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]