Re: [OctDev] Re: new release

[Quentin S. <qsp...@ie...>]

John W. Eaton wrote:

>On 29-Dec-2005, David Bateman wrote:
>
>| > I think decrufting and supporting older versions of octave at the same 
>| > time is not practical, so I'm arguing for a clean break.
>
>Sorry, I was traveling for a week, then out of commission with some
>flu-like thing, then traveling again.  I have a backlog of patches
>(including the code for the package system) that I will try to work
>through as soon as possible.
>  
>

While we're still discussing a new release sometime soon, I'd like to 
repeat a request I made a while ago. Can we remove the nonfree directory 
from octave-forge and make it a separate package? Even though it's not 
installed by default, I am required to use a modified version of the 
source package to comply with Fedora Extras policies. When I brought 
this up before, I believe the Debian maintainer said they should 
technically be doing the same thing as well.

-Quentin