Re: merging functions from octave-forge

[Quentin Spencer]

David Bateman wrote:

> I support this fully, and will help a bit with the time. But please 
> can others on this list see this as a call for help and make the 
> necessary changes to the functions John mentions that they own.

....

> This should all go together with a major decruftication of 
> octave-forge, as there are lots of special casing for different 
> versions of octave, and lots of code that is obseleted by other 
> changes in octave (bitand, trisolve, SymBand).

I own a function or two in octave-forge, and I'm willing to take on some 
others as I have time. After making any necessary modifications, what is 
the best way of dealing with them, send to one of the lists? Also, I 
thought about working on updating the octave-forge plotting commands to 
deal with the new syntax, but I'm wondering what the plans are for 
octave-forge. Do we want to split into new and old branches in CVS as 
has been done for octave 2.1 and 2.9, or just move ahead assuming the 
new releases of octave forge will be only for new releases of octave 
(which is fine with me)?

-Quentin