On 10/11/2012 10:11 AM, Jamie Bullock wrote: > > On 10 Oct 2012, at 21:24, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> wrote: >>> >>> I've got mixed feelings about this. It's clearly "much preferrable" to do >>> it this way on Linux distros, which provide these packages. >>> >>> On Mac it's a minor headache to 1. install a package manager 2. install the >>> dependencies 3. make sure the build system can find the dependencies >>> >>> On Windows: ?? >>> >>> OTOH, for the sake of including 3 headers in svn, everyone could just type >>> "make", and they're done. >>> >>> Anyhow, to conform to the policies and conventions of the Pd svn, I've >>> removed the headers and added the requisite instructions to the README as >>> suggested. >> >> I've seen people include external headers many times over the years, and >> I've also seen bugs arise because of it, because those included headers were >> out of date, and the person building didn't realized that the project >> included its own version of the header rather than using the 'official' one. >> >> The question to answer is: who are the people going to be building this from >> source? The vast majority of users will want to download the binaries and >> never even think about the source code. From my experience, I would guess >> that people who would want to compile it themselves will likely be >> interested in DSSI and LADSPA for other things also, and therefore will need >> to have those headers in a simple place for other projects too. >> > > I probably came across as more grumpy about this than I actually am! I agree > with the exact points you've made here, but I can also think of cases where > it's more desirable to commit things to svn. I tend to take a pragmatic view, > weighing up the reasons for / against on a case-by-case basis. In this > specific case I think you're right that the people compiling from source are > likely to be on either a Linux audio box or Mac with Fink / MacPorts / > Homebrew so I'm perfectly happy with the decision to remove the headers :) > >> Does pluginhost~ work on Windows? I didn't realize that. Does anyone >> distribute dssi or ladspa binaries for Windows? >> > > It *should* work on Windows. The Audacity project provides a bunch of LADSPA > plugins for Windows: > http://wiki.audacityteam.org/index.php?title=Ladspa_Plug-ins > > pluginhost~ doesn't require that the UI part of DSSI is running, so it should > make it possible to run some of the synths under Windows with no GUI. > > Jamie
Ok, if you're ready to make a 1.0 release: http://puredata.info/docs/developer/MakingALibraryRelease Let me know once the tarball is posted, and I'll make the 'official' Debian package. I'll keep the packaging stuff (i.e. the debian/ folder) in a separate repo in the Debian pkg-multimedia team's git repo. Do you want to keep the debian/ folder in your SVN folder? I normally delete it, but its fine to keep it there, as long as you're aware that I won't be updating it there anymore, but only in the pkg-multimedia git. .hc _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
