The One Install Folder to Rule Them All makes it very easy to install stuff. Separate folders would be messy in a different way, then we'd need folders for:
externals abstractions gui plugins loaders fonts sound files video files textfiles freeframe frei0r effectv etc. If you want a 'freeframe' folder, I say make one in your project and add it using [path] or [declare -path]. .hc On 02/07/2013 01:25 PM, me.grimm wrote: > pix_freeframe will load a plugin if it in the standard Pd path ... yes > > BUT thats kind of messy no? > > my ideal solution would be all freeframe (and frei0r) plugins would be > in a folder called "freeframe" and "frei0r" respectively in the > standard path. > > i have always, when building a project, just put freeframe plus in my > project folder and used [declare] but i think for beginer students, > for example, haveing a folder in std path would make more sense... > > but i wonder can a single object declare a new path when initialized > such as pd-extended/freeframe without the actual use of [declare] in a > patch or when pd is started? idk... > > m > > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I don't use any of this stuff, but I'm happy help make it easy to use >> plugins. >> I imagine that pix_freeframe and pix_frei0r search the standard Pd path for >> plugins, or if not, could be made to without too much work. >> >> What are the particular issues there? >> >> .hc >> >> On 02/07/2013 01:02 PM, me.grimm wrote: >>> if we take into account: >>> pix_freeframe (it would be nice/easy if when initiaized it looked in >>> pd's standard path for a "freeframe" folder maybe?) >>> pix_frei0r (same deal) >>> glsl effects (i never did quite figure out an easy way to chain effects) >>> >>> but other than effects that could be accomplished with these, what else? >>> >>> im curious because i have only used pidip a couple of times but have >>> always been able to find a way to do what i desired in gem... somehow. >>> >>> m >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Pagano, Patrick >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> It has a ton of effects that Gem does not have >>>> There is not really a comparison. Gem does not compete so to speak because >>>> Gem does other things supremely well >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>>> me.grimm >>>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 11:08 AM >>>> To: Hans-Christoph Steiner >>>> Cc: [email protected]; John Harrison >>>> Subject: Re: [PD] pidip >>>> >>>> i would wonder. what does pidip got that gem does not? >>>> and cant those things that it got that gem does not be added to gem via >>>> original gpl code? >>>> why have more than one vid lib >>>> at least in pdx >>>> >>>> m >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'm not aware of that. Perhaps you're thinking about how pidip should >>>>> all be GPL, since it is based on GPL code. The GPL does not allow >>>>> more license restrictions, and the pidip license does just that. So >>>>> that means that the GPL code included in pidip is still GPL, but the >>>>> code that sevy contributed is under his license, and those two >>>>> licenses conflict. So basically, pidip is not legal to distribute in >>>>> binary form because of the conflicting licenses within itself. >>>>> >>>>> Whether you choose to ignore copyright law is your decision. I am >>>>> personally fine with people distributing pidip as its own thing and >>>>> using it with any of my code as long as: >>>>> >>>>> 1) the pidip distro is clearly marked as non-free >>>>> 2) pidip is not bundled with my GPLed code (i.e. as part of >>>>> pd-extended, pd-l2ork, etc.) >>>>> >>>>> .hc >>>>> >>>>> On 02/06/2013 11:44 AM, John Harrison wrote: >>>>>> I thought there was an earlier version of PiDiP which was and could >>>>>> be included with Pd-extended because it was released under an >>>>>> acceptable/compatible license? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner >>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just be aware that pidip is not free software because it has clauses >>>>>>> in its license that restrict what it can be used for. Including >>>>>>> pidip in your package means your package can no longer be legally >>>>>>> distributed as binaries since the pidip license terms conflict with the >>>>>>> GPL license terms. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> .hc >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 02/06/2013 09:27 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote: >>>>>>>> I just finished cleaning up both pdp and pidip libs to be fully >>>>>>> auto-buildable >>>>>>>> as part of pd-l2ork (including freenect, artoolkit, opencv, etc.). >>>>>>>> There >>>>>>> are a >>>>>>>> number of packages you need to install from launchpad in order to >>>>>>>> get >>>>>>> all the >>>>>>>> externals to build. Stay tuned for the next release coming soon >>>>>>>> with >>>>>>> these >>>>>>>> enhancements... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> [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 >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> [email protected] mailing list >>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ____________________ >>>> m.e.grimm | m.f.a | ed.m. >>>> [email protected] >>>> _________________________________ >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> [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
