On 10/19/2012 03:03 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > On 10/19/2012 06:08 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> >> Any objections? Shall I go with lazy consensus on this one? >> >> .hc >> >> On 10/16/2012 07:17 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >>> >>> Hey all, >>> >>> I was tired of dealing with a cryptic ./configure, so I converted OSCx >>> to be based on the Library Template. THis is currently in the >>> pd-extended/0.43 branch. >>> >>> Anyone have any objections of me removing the old OSCx and replacing it >>> with the 'oscx' library? > > > > > why would you want to keep OSCx alive? > i would rather entirely remove this buggy and un-maintained (as in: upstream, > not within PdX) library from any distribution.
Its still widely used and still the easiest way to use OSC, albeit in a limited way. If someone makes comparably easy way to use OSC, then I see no reason to keep this one. > and i don't get the point of replacing "OSCx" by "oscx". Every other library folder in externals/ is all lower case. .hc _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev