[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: globally installed packages vs. relocatable Octave
From: |
c. |
Subject: |
Re: globally installed packages vs. relocatable Octave |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Nov 2014 10:10:35 +0100 |
On 6 Nov 2014, at 22:59, Juan Pablo Carbajal <address@hidden> wrote:
> Are we porting pkg.m form here [1] to core? I will be wiling to help
> if that is the case.
> [1]
> https://bitbucket.org/carandraug/octave/branch/default?head=d670ed4e5ae64541056dec352af0901270a381c9
>
> This pkg.m is more modular than the current version.
Juan Pablo,
I haven't looked at the code in your repository
for a long time but I remeber that it was definitely
much more readable and easy to maintain than the
current version of pkg.m
On the other hand I vaguely recall there were quite a few
missing features with respect to the current version.
I don't remember what those missing features were though,
do you?
Could you make a list of what you think it would take
to make the new pkg.m a viable replacement for the current
one and how much time it would take to do so?
c.