Hi lør, 07 03 2009 kl. 11:25 +0100, skrev Thomas Treichl: > Søren Hauberg schrieb: > > lør, 07 03 2009 kl. 10:35 +0100, skrev Thomas Treichl: > >> If they don't get into Octave core right now then make them a new separate > >> package because they have so little to do with the rest of the plot > >> package, > >> like I said, "visualization of volumetric data". > > > > I'm not the one making decisions about what goes into Octave core, and > > this list isn't the right one for dealing with this issue. Martin, if > > you'd like this to go straight into Octave core, then we should discuss > > this on [email protected]. > > I know that, but just for starting a basic discussion to where the code > should > go to (even if decision are different later) this definitely is just one of > the > right places. Once Martin say's his code is ready for inclusion into either > Octave-Forge or Octave core he can decide for himself if he wants to send a > changeset to the Octave core maintainer's list or put his code at OF...
I only mentioned this since Martin has posted his code to this list, and the h...@octave list. Since Martin is fairly new to the community I thought it should be mentioned that if he wants his code in the core of Octave, then he should post his stuff at the maintainer list. > > If the code doesn't work with gnuplot, then I would think we should wait > > a while before getting this into core. At the moment I guess it's mostly > > developers who are using the FLTK backend, while most users are using > > gnuplot. So, it might be a bit early to push something that only works > > with an experimental backend. But hey, that's just my opinion and I > > don't really have much to say. > > I thought this isn't the right place to discuss this, you said!? I'm not sure which place is the right place. In the end, I think Martin should decide this. It all depends on where he wants his code. > > Wrt. to which package we could put this into, then the 'plot' package is > > mostly an empty package, so I think it would be fine to put iso* stuff > > in there. My opinion is that we have too many small packages at the > > moment. > > Which? Please give examples so that *we all* at OF can talk about it. I just remember one of the Debian guys saying that it was a pain that we had so many packages. From the top of my head, I'd say that 'special-matrix' and 'Struct' are pretty good candidates for being merged with other packages. Søren ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
