3.0 when?

[Benjamin Lindner]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 18-Dec-2007, Michael Goffioul wrote:
> 
> | On 12/18/07, Tatsuro MATSUOKA <tmacchant at yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
> | > Hello Benjamin
> | >
> | > Benjamin wrote
> | > > I would vote for moving edit.m from the forge package to octave core
> | > > functions.
> | > > Argument is similar to the imread/imwrite topic. Why should I first
> | > > install a package to be able to conveniently invoke an editor.
> | > >
> | > > It would also allow easier use of a packaged editor with the mingw binaries.
> | >
> | > That's a good idea!!
> | > I also vote for moving edit.m from the forge package to octave core functions.
> | 
> | Why not also package octave-forge in the mingw binaries?
> 
> I think it would be best if the standalone Windows distributions were
> essentially the same except for the choice of compiler.  Would it be
> difficult to make that happen?

It is of course possible, but not really necessary, since the mingw 
package contains the compiler that the package was compiled with and 
then forge packages can be added afterwards on-the-fly (if the 
dependencies are met, of course).

I see the advantage of the mingw package exactly there, you can build 
forge-packages on your own.

But of course I'm open for opinions.

benjamin