Re: very small packages - merge into general/miscelleneous or move into core

[c.]

On 27 Jan 2014, at 11:03, Olaf Till <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 07:35:43AM +0100, c. wrote:
>> <snip>
>> and
>> "parcellfun" and "pararrayfun" (and therfore "fsave", "fload" the latter 
>> depend upon) 
>> from "general".
> 
> They would fit into "parallel". The reason Jaroslav kept them in
> "general" was to have them under control there in a package maintained
> by himself, as he said. It seems this reason doesn't exist
> anymore.

Indeed, as Jaroslav is not maintaining "general" anymore it does not
make sense to keep those functions there.

> OTOH, apart from the discussed reorganization of packages,
> there seems to be no urgent need to move them --- they don't seem to
> need much maintanance, or do they?

well, they do seem to show some issue on OSX which I was trying to fix:

 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/problems-installing-openmpi-ext-td4656543i60.html
  

with not much success, unfortunately :(

> It could be a disadvantadge for
> some if they were moved into "parallel", since "parallel" seems
> notorious to be problematic to install on non-standard operating
> systems.

Moving those functions to "parallel" would be OK to me as I don't see
any issue with the installation of that package on my systems.
You're one of that package maintainers so I'll leave the decision to 
you about this. If you need help with those functions feel free to add 
me as an additional maintainer.

Alternatively I'd be glad to take over the maintainance of 
parcellfun/pararrayfun, 
but I have no interest in maintaining @dict or @InputParser, so that would
require moving parcellfun, pararrayfun, fload, fsave and __exit__ out of 
"general",
into their own package.

> Olaf

c.