On Feb 10, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote: >> Why have two wiimote objects? Is there a specific reason why they can't >> be merged? If we pool the work on it we'll have one better wiimote >> object versus two different wiimote objects that are both less good. > > Do you mind elaborating why you believe both objects are "less good" in and > of themselves? IMO disis_wiimote is much more robust than the wiimote object > (at least the last time I tested) in every respect and provides entirely > xrun-free functionality. If we agree the aforesaid statement is true (not > that I am suggesting that you do agree) then it is not that both are less > good but rather the one is better than the other literally in every respect > which should in theory make the whole process of selection a lot simpler. > > Also, suggested pooling may not be always the best approach, particularly if > there is limited transparency in terms of how such process is managed (which > BTW I think is the core reason why pd-l2ork and disis_wiimote exist in the > first place, and consequently why pd community at large is having trouble > with the uptake). Also, let us not forget that at the very core of the > open-source idea is the "survival of the fittest" model (with a caveat, > however; read * below). This means if one external works better than another, > it will simply supersede its operation, particularly if their output is > essentially the same. Renaming it (or using other practical alternatives to > "pooling"), provided credit is given where credit is due, is at this point > irrelevant and should be considered synonymous to pooling, particularly in > this case where disis_wiimote AFAIK does everything wiimote does except it > does it in a way that is (IMO) more robust** > > *Of course, any dev has every right to continue to maintain their own version > for whatever reason and thus defy the context of the survival of the fittest > regardless whether they are maintaining one of the "fittest" or less "fit" > versions. Also, obviously everyone is entitled to their own definition of > what constitutes "fittest" iteration... > > **Based on 2.5+ years of experience of having a bunch of students with no > prior Linux/PD experience messing with the system, including the wiimote > external. I hope others would agree that the object's stability is best > tested when used by others than the developer who usually focuses on aspects > that best cater to their own needs and that may not be always as > all-encompassing to cover all use cases. Thus, the greatest collection of > instabilities will surface through third-party use. The same is true for pd > as a whole... > > Best wishes,
For one thing, I cannot "apt-get install pd-disis-wiimote". Another thing, I know that pd-wiimote has had quite a bit of testing when using 6 wiimotes simultaneously. You are of course free to do whatever you want with the code, no one is challenging that. I am talking about contributing patches upstream. That's widely accepted as the best practice, and then forking is a good second option. .hc ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to realize his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them, or perish. -William Carlos Williams _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
