Re: Removing control, finance and quaternion toolboxes

[David Bateman]

Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> * David Bateman <address@hidden> [2008-07-27 01:50]:
> 
>> Although not attached here, due to its size, you can get the changeset
>> that removes these toolboxes from http://hg.dbateman.org/octave where it
>> is changeset number 8351.
>>
>> [snip]
> 
> I am just curious: will this become a common practice in the development of
> Octave, I mean, removing parts of it and maintaining them as separate
> packages?  I think that this is a good idea, in general, and would suggest
> that the code dependent on libglpk and libqhull also become separate
> packages.  This would reduce the list of necessary dependencies for the
> Octave core package.
> 


I think the goal is that the user has a reasonable expectation of
finding the same core functions in Octave as in Matlab, and the rest we
can split off as separate packages particularly if they aren't used
extensively. I suppose that means that the code dependent on libglpk
might be split off, but libqhull will probably have to stay as the
delaunay, etc are Matlab core functions that are extensively used.

D.