On 5 April 2012 12:01, Lukas Reichlin <lukas.reichlin.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Aaah, the Octave Core vs. Octave Forge story.
Yes, I wish we could fix this organisational issue once and for all. One of my goals for this GSoC is to improve Savannah so at least we can make it easier to move both OF to Savannah with little difficulty to the people working on OF. If not, perhaps during OctConf 2012, we can all sit down and think long and hard about how to fix the core vs Forge schism. We really should be working a lot closer together for many reasons. Will you be able to come? > I think we should group OF packages into different classes as the > long list on > http://octave.sourceforge.net/packages.php is rather confusing. For > example, we could use three classes: > > - main: only about a dozen of packages. The most popular ones, of > general use. High quality. Tested and actively > developed/maintained. What the average user needs, see debian > below. > > - extra: the less common ones. narrow scope, less tested, under > nconstruction, … > > - legacy: unmaintained, outdated and fragile ones, like the > "symbolic" package. I very much like this idea. Can you do it? > PS: Sorry for hijacking the thread. Yeah, just change the subject line next time. I just did that. - Jordi G. H. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. Free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
