bicycle…bicyclone
> On 23 Feb 2016, at 21:46, Matt Barber <brbrof...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Alexandre suggested "recyclone," which I kind of like. "Cyclone" gets its > name as a portmanteau of "cycling" and "clone," and it happens to be an > english word. I rather like "typhoon," but "recyclone" makes it clear that > it's a continuation of the original cyclone, while adding "recycle" to the > portmanteau. > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 3:32 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoel...@iem.at > <mailto:zmoel...@iem.at>> wrote: > On 02/21/2016 10:18 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > > On 02/21/2016 08:35 PM, Fred Jan Kraan wrote: > >> This mail is the last I will write about cyclone in the foreseeable > >> future. > > > > this is about the worst possible outcome of the entire discussion. > > > >> There are serious plans to save Pure Data and cyclone by adding > >> numerous objects. > > > > what i don't understand is: > > what keeps people from creating a "typhoon" library that adds the > > additional objects? > > > [...] > > > > PS: and what is that "hurricane" library for? > > after thinking some more about this, i think a sensible way to move > forward is for *both* forks of cyclone to change their names. > > cyclone is krzysztof's library. > krzysztof is missing in action. > he has neither officially abandoned the library nor has he (to my > knowledge) authorized anybody to continue on his behalf. > > i agree with chris that this is open source, and that forking is one of > the strengths of open source. > this doesn't mean though, that we should end up with 3 different > versions of the same software that are indistinguishable from outside > though different inside. in german we call this thing a "mogelpackung" > (a euphemism for fraud). > > it doesn't really matter if everybody is only working with their best > intentions in mind. what does matter is, that the end-user is being mislead. > > > i therefore ask both fred and alexandre to change the name of their > library, so that they cannot be confused with both the original cyclone > library and with each other: neither of the forks is an (or /the/) > "official" fork. > for what it is worth, git makes it easy to incorporate changes between > forks (using pull requests, cherry picking,...) even if the names are > different! > > keep both names similar to cyclone if you want to, so that it is > possible to see their relation. > > i still think that "hurricane", "tornado", "typhoon" and "windhoos" are > good candidates. > > > mgrdsa > IOhannes > > PS: of course i am in no position to tell you what to do, but i do think > this is a good opportunity to find a "best practice" forking model in > the Pd world. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at> mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > <http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
