On 2010-12-01 03:02, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > I call mrpeach/net canonical not because I believe is it perfect and > bugfree, but rather because it is the established, proven way of doing > more elaborate networking.
i think it is not canonical as it tends to change it's API to workaround certain problems. > Its the best option out there. iemnet is > just a fork of that with some specific changes. iemnet is very new and > not tested as much, so it seems a really bad idea to start basing things > off of it, i'd rather not read the above. anyhow, i definitely wouldn't call iemnet the "canonical". i think canonicity should be more about the object's API than about the implementation itself. > like how to package things in Debian, etc. Who knows, > perhaps mrpeach/net and iemnet will merge again. that is desireable from my pov (but there is still some work todo on the iemnet part, which i would like to be not hindered by legacy code) fgmasdr IOhannes
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
