Re: Merging new audio functionality into Octave

[c.]

On 1 Oct 2013, at 18:55, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 10/01/2013 12:50 PM, Mike Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:10:13 -0400, John W. Eaton wrote:
>>> On 10/01/2013 10:24 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 09:34 -0400, Mike Miller wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm interested to hear how the maintainers feel about merging the new
>>>>> audio functionality that was developed for GSoC into Octave.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> More generally, I think we should start merging in *all* of our GSoC
>>>> code. It doesn't look like we failed any student who coded throughout
>>>> GSoC, so we should take this as an indication that we consider their
>>>> contributions viable.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I'm not comfortable with merging all GSoC contributions this close to the
>>> release.  I'd like to take a look at them first.
>> 
>> If I prepare a branch of the audio work for you to review by some date
>> (how close is "this close" now?), is there a possibility that you will
>> be willing to look at it and merge it for this upcoming release or
>> would you prefer to put it off regardless? IOW, should I bother
>> putting effort into getting it ready in the day or so or just let it
>> sit?
> 
> Audio functionality is a good candidate for the release, I'd just like to 
> look at it first.  The things you mentioned about configure options should 
> probably all be done before the release though.  How long do you think those 
> change will take?
> 
> jwe

John,

What about the incomplete factorizations?

I haven't had time yet to look at Kai's code
in the final submission but what I saw at midterm
looked quite good so I don't expect it to take much
work to be merged. 

On the other hand it will need adding a new dependency
on itsol which is not packaged for many systems 
so it might complicate packaging Octave.

c.