On 10/20/2012 04:07 AM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > On 10/20/2012 01:26 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> I'm not going to take on the maintenance of those patches, so just copying >> them into Pd-extended is not an option. I'm think Pd-extended should have an >> 'oscx' compatible library , and 'oscx' is already there, tested, etc. > > "etc" means "known to be buggy & unmaintained". > > i'm not arguing against OSCx because of it's architectural flaws but because > it's not working as it should.
I'd happily ditch it if there was a drop in replacement. For example, I've had many students come to me with the most popular Processing <--> Pd starter patch, and its based on oscx. If it wasn't include, that patch would not work at all. So buggy but working is still better than not at all. .hc _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
