--- On Tue, 6/28/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PD-dev] packaging the pddp docs > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011, 8:52 PM > > On Jun 28, 2011, at 2:41 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 6/28/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [PD-dev] packaging the pddp docs > >> To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <[email protected]> > >> Cc: [email protected] > >> Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011, 7:20 PM > >> > >> On Jun 28, 2011, at 1:10 PM, Jonathan Wilkes > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm already kind of doing that with > pd-l2ork. > >>>> I've revised Miller's > >>>>> control/audio/ds tutorials. > Pd-l2ork has > >> fixed > >>>> the crasher bug when > >>>>> a patch closes itself, so I've got a > >> navigation > >>>> toolbar in those > >>>>> tutorials > >>>>> that is currently incompatible with > >>>> pd-extended/vanilla. > >>>> > >>>> I had no idea. Ico seems to work on > his > >> own. It > >>>> would be great to > >>>> have those bug fixes submitted to the > patch > >> tracker. > >>>> The patch > >>>> tracker is what Miller, IOhannes, Martin > Peach, me > >> and > >>>> others use for > >>>> keeping track of patches that are meant to > go > >> into > >>>> pure-data core. > >>> > >>> He's also working off 0.42 currently, so > submitting to > >> the > >>> tracker would be pointless. I think > someone was > >> working > >>> to port the changes forward to 0.43, but Ico > is > >> currently > >>> on vacation and I'm not sure where they are in > the > >> process. > >> > >> I merged in a couple things from l2ork, like Joe > Sarlo's > >> Magic Glass and inlet/outlet highlighting. > More > >> patches would be great to have. > > > > As far as I understand there are a lot of changes in > Pd-l2ork > > to core Pd, and if you accepted them into Pd-extended > it would > > introduce more discrepancies between vanilla and > extended. If > > that's a possibility you'd entertain to get the some > of the > > functionality that pd-l2ork adds, then I can help with > this > > process. > > > Bug fixes should definitely be included, other patches are > on a case by case basis. Accepting patches is a time > consuming process, especially if the patch submitted are not > super clean or has not been thoroughly tested. That's > the main reason for patches to be rejected or ignored. > > I've gone thru a lot of patches from l2ork before, and > found that they were not well tested, sometimes didn't even > apply cleanly, and sometimes introduced new bugs. It > seems that Ico didn't want to work thru the patch process, > and instead is working on a fork. That's a good way to > develop solid, well tested patches so it could be that a lot > of the l2ork stuff is ready to be resubmitted. Well, like I said, it's still based off 0.42. When it gets ported to 0.43, maybe we can figure out a way to do this. -Jonathan > > .hc > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Mistrust authority - promote decentralization. - the > hacker ethic > > > _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
