Well,
Too many messages for this morning... later responses will come... i think
we are getting closer to a team work.. :D
Just to point out something interesting.. the notes below has a good
workflow strategy to deal with packaging on the source. The main idea is
create branches with the files f
tim,
yup with you all the way here, i've been chatting
a bit to mescalinum about his work with gentoo
too, and i'm pretty sure we're all after the same
goal.
cheers,
dmotd
Tim Jones wrote:
> > pd-extended could be assembled from parts as a
> > meta package, there's no issue there.
>
> I gues
IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> dmotd wrote:
>> dmotd wrote:
>>> please make sure you cc pd-dev too!
>>
>> oh i'm sorry, it seems that something is wrong with my mail delivery -
>> i checked the archives and messages recieved only to my personal inbox
>> did make it to pd-dev i just didn't recieve t
> pd-extended could be assembled from parts as a
> meta package, there's no issue there.
I guess my point is that, if I download the pd-extended tarball, it is
not easy at all to assemble it as a series of parts, not as easy and
efficient as it could be. At the very least, I think there needs to b
On Sep 22, 2009, at 1:04 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
i agree (and honestly i don't think a CPAN-like system will happen
anytime soon).
It will happen as soon as someone does it. :D I don't think
anyone objects to the idea, right?
well, like always - i d
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
i agree (and honestly i don't think a CPAN-like system will happen
anytime soon).
It will happen as soon as someone does it. :D I don't think anyone
objects to the idea, right?
well, like always - i do :-)
i agree with dmotd, that such a thing has to be tho
On Sep 22, 2009, at 12:38 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
2) remove "m_pd.h" from externals and use (why do I need
to have PD source to compile my external? This should be installed
as any other library and linked with -l option; the m_pd.h should
be installe
dmotd wrote:
dmotd wrote:
please make sure you cc pd-dev too!
oh i'm sorry, it seems that something is wrong
with my mail delivery - i checked the archives and
messages recieved only to my personal inbox did
make it to pd-dev i just didn't recieve them from
pd-dev and some messages from pd
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
2) remove "m_pd.h" from externals and use (why do I need to
have PD source to compile my external? This should be installed as any
other library and linked with -l option; the m_pd.h should be
installed on /usr/include also)
sounds good
hmm, Debian's offici
First off, just to be clear, I don't think anyone wants to keep the
big monolithic build system or the package. Its a big hack/kludge
that is not maintainable going forward. I answered some other random
questions below as well.
On Sep 21, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Anderson Goulart wrote:
And
dmotd wrote:
> please make sure you cc pd-dev too!
oh i'm sorry, it seems that something is wrong
with my mail delivery - i checked the archives and
messages recieved only to my personal inbox did
make it to pd-dev i just didn't recieve them from
pd-dev and some messages from pd-dev never made
Steffen Juul wrote:
>
> On 21/09/2009, at 16.59, dmotd wrote:
>
>> or pehaps pd could go down the path of perl/cpan,
>> php/pear etc, where extra non-base libs are housed
>> in a dedicated on demand server where users can
>> automagically fetch / compile and install extras
>> outside of the confine
nice to see a lot of discussion, i can't fathom
replying to the various threads happening
here as i am fairly time poor at present, but i
thought i'd take the time to make my position as
clear as possible before getting mixed up with any
particular argument. apologies if i become a bit
verbos
please make sure you cc pd-dev too!
Anderson Goulart wrote:
> Hello dmotd,
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM, dmotd wrote:
>
> i guess i understand where you're coming from and
> in some ways i think you are right, however
> packaging debs is not as simple as it seems and
> w
So with a couple of perhaps narrow-minded rants out of the way, I
would like now to respond to dmotd.
>
> i guess i understand where you're coming from and
> in some ways i think you are right, however
> packaging debs is not as simple as it seems and
> with the sheer size of the externals repo wh
Sorry I lurk too much and forget I have to reply-to-all to mailing
lists on gmail. Looks like my message has been completely in
Anderson's response earlier.
>> I understand the motivation for pd-extended is to just fork to a
>> stable version. Is this the only reason? Why not just release stable,
Hello Tim,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Tim Jones wrote:
> I've been tweaking a pd-extended Gentoo ebuild for personal use for
> the last few weeks. It makes more sense to me to package extensions
> etc. (maybe just "addons" more generally) separately.
>
> Actually I now wonder, why even hav
Hello dmotd,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM, dmotd wrote:
> i guess i understand where you're coming from and
> in some ways i think you are right, however
> packaging debs is not as simple as it seems and
> with the sheer size of the externals repo what you
> are suggesting would get quite unm
Hi Hans,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>
> Hey Anderson,
>
> Its good timing for bringing these up, Günter has stopped maintaining his
> official Debian packages, so they are officially orphaned right now. Anyone
> here a Debian Developer? I am starting the pro
On 21/09/2009, at 16.59, dmotd wrote:
or pehaps pd could go down the path of perl/cpan,
php/pear etc, where extra non-base libs are housed
in a dedicated on demand server where users can
automagically fetch / compile and install extras
outside of the confines of a package manager.
how much wo
i guess i understand where you're coming from and
in some ways i think you are right, however
packaging debs is not as simple as it seems and
with the sheer size of the externals repo what you
are suggesting would get quite unmanageable.
for the record, i am currently working on a
slightly re
Hey Anderson,
Its good timing for bringing these up, Günter has stopped maintaining
his official Debian packages, so they are officially orphaned right
now. Anyone here a Debian Developer? I am starting the process of
becoming a Debian Developer (and I'll be helping to run DebCof 2010 in
Hello IOhannes,
thanks for your answer...
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 4:08 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> Anderson Goulart wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>
> puredata-ext-XX - package containing a single external
>> puredata-abs-XX - package containing a single abstraction
>>
>
> why do you want to se
Anderson Goulart wrote:
Hello all,
puredata-ext-XX - package containing a single external
puredata-abs-XX - package containing a single abstraction
why do you want to separate them?
how does a "single external" differ (substantially) from a "single
abstraction"? (esp. since .deb takes care
Hello all,
I am new to this list but met Hans and others at ISCL in Brazil a few weeks
ago. Maybe this subject was discussed earlier, and if so, please forgive me.
I was looking through pd-extended build farm, scripts and compilation stuff.
A good idea, actually, but difficult to maintain or dis
25 matches
Mail list logo
