planning to tag 5.14 release branch circa Dec 2

On Sat, November 24, 2007 at  9:15AM, Robert Dodier wrote:
> On 11/23/07, Dan Gildea wrote:
> 
> > The maxima distribution already includes a couple .el files,
> > without .elc versions.  Some rpms include the .elc files,
> > and put them in the standard emacs directories, which maxima's
> > install procedure does not.  Imaxima's install procedure compiles
> > .el to .elc by running emacs.
> 
> So your recommendation to include or not include .elc files is ... ??

not include.

> > Imaxima requires the breqn package, so it won't work out of the box
> > for most people even if they have latex and emacs installed.
> > I think we can address this by having imaxima give an informative
> > error message if breqn is missing.
> 
> OK. breqn is a little problematic due to the license, but I don't see
> any better way to handle it.

as a matter of fact, the license situation for breqn has just been  
sorted out - AMS has turned it over to Morten Hoegholm and it is
now available under the latex project public license:
http://tug.ctan.org/pkg/mh

> > The file imaxima.lisp will need to be modified to replace
> > mstringp with stringp for the upcoming release of maxima.
> > For reasons like this, it seems like it would be a good idea
> > to maintain imaxima as part of the maxima distribution.
> 
> Well, the imaxima project seems to be doing OK by itself
> so I don't see a need to merge it with Maxima.
> If the current maintainer requests it, I'd be willing to consider.
> As for mstringp, I'll just throw in (defun mstringp (x) (stringp x))
> for the benefit of imaxima and probably other programs.

I mainly just think it would be helpful to have a nice interface
without having to download a lot of extra pieces.  but agreed
it's up to the maintainer of imaxima.