On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 19:05 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > On Jun 14, 2007, at 1:07 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote: > > > On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 21:46 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > > > > >> It would very nice if it was just plug and play. It would not be > >> that hard to do it. I think you could spend a day on it and have it > >> working smoothly. It would be very worthwhile, but I think you have > >> already spent far more time trying to help people get it going than > >> it would take to fix things. > > > > reading that post a second time, i feel somehow insulted by your > > assumption, that i consciously do not fix things, that simply could be > > fixed spending a day for them. so, please tell me, what do you think > > needs to be fixed? > > Certainly no insult of any kind was intended. I was just quite > frustrated by the experience. We were having a network jam at the > end of the NIME conference, a few of us wanted to use netpd. But > only Alexandre was able to get it running.
hm, i am sorry about that. > Please don't take my comments to be saying something bad about your > skills or the work you put it. It can be a hard problem to solve, > getting everything running smoothly, but it is certainly possible. > You have been very good at providing help for people to get it up and > running. I'd just like to see netpd get to the point where you can > spend less time helping people get it running and more time improving > things. as i said, i know the problems (if they could be considered as problems), but didn't find a way around them. > In the general terms, I think it should be quite possible to make > netpd "just work" on any Pd-extended install with the user just > opening a patch in Pd. If you want to base netpd on pd-vanilla, then > you'll need to provide any externals that are needed for the various > platforms. netpd actually should 'just' work with any pd-installation, though three points are critical: - having the right externals loaded (that is: zexy, maxlib, iemmatrix, iemlib1, iemlib2, iem_t3_lib) - having the correct netpd-path in the netpd-settings dialog (this one annoys me most, because it is due to the 'open-message-path-is-relative-to-pd's-startlocation'-problem [to mention this problem again]) -having netpd/abs in the pathes if these settings are correct and netpd is still not working, then something is definitely wrong. luckily just yesterday, i had a (very simple) idea, for which i waited for years: instead of opening the netpd-patches with the (for me) inconvenient 'open'-message, i want to load them as abstractions. this has the BIG advantage, that i can specify the location of a patch (now abstraction) relative to the parent patch (creator in this case). by doing that i can get rid of the very unwanted 'netpd-path' setting. AND this has a very nice side effect: when all patches are actually the same patch, i can add a search patch with only one [declare], that is valid for all loaded netpd-patches (now abstractions). in short: in future versions of netpd there will be no need for 'netpd-path' and for a -path flag anymore. there is one critical point left: having to have loaded the right externals. with [declare], each netpd-patch can define for itself, what it wants to have loaded. that means, the only thing, a user will have to care, is to have installed the needed externals (which is the case anyway in extended) i actually don't have time to implement all these changes and afaik the actual stable release of pd-extended is based on 0.39, which lacks [declare]. but when pd-extended switches to 0.40 and i'll have made the necessary changes, things will be hopefully much easier than today for eveveryone, the pd-extended users and pd-vanilla/external users. roman ___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
_______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list