--- On Mon, 12/6/10, i...@vt.edu <i...@vt.edu> wrote:
> From: i...@vt.edu <i...@vt.edu> > Subject: Re: [PD] call for testers for L2Ork iteration of pd-extended (based > on 0.42.x branch) > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancs...@yahoo.com> > Cc: "Hans-Christoph Steiner" <h...@at.or.at>, "'PD List'" <pd-list@iem.at> > Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 1:16 AM > > And where does merging your > changes in with pd-extended 0.43 fit > > into all this? > > Not sure. I've submitted at least half-dozen patches into > the sourceforge > already and many more via mailing list and only a fraction > of them have been > looked at, and even less merged. Granted, some of them are > somewhat > controversial (e.g. revamping the scrolling algorithm), yet > with such a low > response rate one certainly feels discouraged in > contributing further, The argument as I understand it is that all your patches apply to 0.42-5. So pick the simplest feature or bugfix you've implemented and submit it as a patch for 0.43. If you get feedback and/or it gets merged, end of discouragement. If you don't, then the development process is broken and needs fixing. If I knew how I'd do it myself. -Jonathan > particularly considering just how time-consuming > fragmenting improvements into > sub-patches can be. OTOH, I do understand just how hard it > can be for one > to maintain code when there are a bunch of patches > trickling in at all > times--it's a full-time job in and of itself, particularly > in respect to > regressions. Yet, having spent good two weeks chasing > exactly such regressions > and IMHO improving editor experience to the point where > both show-stopping as > well as usability bugs have been by and large squashed, I > certainly hope they > will find their way eventually into the core Pd. The code > produced so far has > been clean and (apart from fprintf's for debugging purposes > that are currently > commented out awaiting further potential development) > should be rather easy to > merge into the main trunk. The real question is whether > Hans, or perhaps more > importantly Miller will find doing so to be of their > interest. > > All that said, I think I'll continue to maintain a L2Ork > variation until either > its feature-set becomes synonymous with the core Pd package > or there is no more > reason to maintain it (and FWIW as of right now there are > plenty, so I don't see > me stopping the support anytime soon). > > Cheers! > > Ico > _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list