--- On Thu, 7/7/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots of new editing features > To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <[email protected]>, "Ivica Ico Bukvic" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, July 7, 2011, 9:20 PM > > On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:06 -0700, "Jonathan Wilkes" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > --- On Thu, 7/7/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots > of new editing features > > > To: "Ivica Ico Bukvic" <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Date: Thursday, July 7, 2011, 5:33 PM > > > > > > On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:39 +0200, "Ivica Ico > Bukvic" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I ended up refactoring the magic glass > and > > > highlighting code quite a > > > > > bit, I think there might be something > worth > > > checking out. As for > > > > > other bug fixes, it would be great to > have them > > > in the patch tracker > > > > > so we can sort them out. It would > take me a > > > massive amount of time to > > > > > figure out what code changes are for > what in > > > pdl2ork since there isn't > > > > > any version control (that I could find > at least) > > > and it seems to be a > > > > > mix of 0.42 and 0.43 versions. > > > > > > > > It's based off of 0.42.6 extended tree. As > for > > > submitting patches, I've > > > > been doing this in the past. Alas, a good > number of > > > them never got any > > > > attention which is not very encouraging. > > > > > > If you look at the patch tracker, and filter on > Closed > > > ones, you'll see > > > which ones get accepted. Most do. It takes a > > > lot of time to review > > > patches, so if they don't cleanly apply and > build, then I'm > > > not really > > > likely to pursue it much further. I've tried > figuring > > > out patches like > > > that in the past, and it just takes too much time > to try to > > > figure out > > > what's wrong, etc. and it doesn't speak well of > the > > > patch if it doesn't > > > past the first hurdle. > > > > > > .hc > > > > bugfix 3127123 Closed > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3127123&group_id=55736&atid=478072 > Accepted with comments. Am I missing something? > > > bugfix 3110267 Open, no comments, no assignees > > patch 3077431 Open, comments, I emailed the cyclone > author to ask if he's > > ok with Ico's improvements... > > No word from the upstream author of cyclone, he's not > active anymore. > The focus of the cyclone library is to be clones of Max/MSP > objects. The Max/MSP stuff is proprietary, so we can only guess at how the code is actually written. So to get a "clone" of a Max object one needs to a) read the Max docs, and b) compare results from using [foo] in Max to using [foo] in Pd. Ico seems to be saying that Max's [coll] isn't causing audio dropouts, and Pd's is, and that his patch fixes this. AFAICT his implementation still adheres to the interface for [coll] listed in the Max docs, so I don't see how this isn't a better clone of Max's [coll] behavior. > I'm not in a place to test that stuff, so I'm not likely to > handle > patches for cyclone. I don't really have a criteria > to judge if its > correct, unless its a really simple bugfix. But if Mr. Czaja says, "Sure, go ahead," you won't have a problem with this patch, right? > > > bugfix 3109768 Open, and I added a new comment (Note: > the comment I added > > is fixed in Pd-l2ork) > > donno, haven't reviewed > > > bugfix 3108513 Open, no comments > > patch out of date, applies to 0.42 but not 0.43 > > > * bugfix 3106837 Open, comments > > commented: Looks worth including, but with GOP bugs, I'm > currently > waiting to see what Miller is going to do with GOP > restructuring before > tackling this stuff. > I still don't really have a > grasp of the GOP code, > so I don't know what the repercussions of GOP-related > patches are. From > my experience, one little simple fix causes some weird > behavior > elsewhere. > > > bugfix 3106799 Open, comments, bug still exists (Note: > fixed in Pd-l2ork) > > bugfix 3102512 Open, comments > > patch 1670440 Closed, accepted > > > > If any of these didn't apply cleanly and didn't build, > there's no comment > > indicating so. > > I haven't necessarily had time to review everything, > nagging and poking > me is perfectly appropriate if you think I should review > something. Ok, but it's not really a solution, because the time I have to nag and poke is probably about the same amount that you have to review stuff. -Jonathan > And > anything assigned to Miller and reviewed positively by > IOhannes I'm > going to defer any action on until Miller responds. > > .hc > > > > > -Jonathan > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > [email protected] > > > mailing list > > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
