I had to bring up semantics because "developer" means alot of different things to alot of different people.
Also, I didn't want to bring up vanilla versus non-vanilla, just pointing out that the number of people who could help Hans put out a new version of extended is rather low. IMO a languishing extended is bad news for Pd in general as it's the go to distribution for most people using Pd ... but that's probably for another debate. We all work on what's important to us, I'm just sad again to see that the priorities don't seem to match up with a concerted joint effort, at least as compared to my experience working with OpenFrameworks. But of course what's considered a "concerted, joint effort" is also up to interpretation :D Hopefully we'll have a development meet up at some point soon. I personally feel guilty seeing things like this come up because I have the *ability* to do it, but I don't have the time when trying to balance life, work, & art. Honestly, this is when I know I'm probably getting in too deep ... This is why I suggested "graduate students". At this point, up keep and versioning should be supported by some sort of institution, if possible, and by people who could be rotated in and out. On Sep 23, 2014, at 10:57 AM, Ivica Bukvic <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I guess you can call me a "developer," whatever that means--I don't > care that much about titles. Yet, I would argue that as far as low level > stuff is concerned in recent years pd-l2ork has certainly pushed the envelope > in terms of core development. Even the feature that has earned me the title > in quotations delves so deep into the core that currently it cannot be > implemented in either vanilla or extended without significant changes even > though it retains full backwards compatibility. I would also argue it is > essential and offers a slew of features that are unavailable in any other > implementation of presets. > > Pd-l2ork's greatest deterrent is exclusivity to Linux, which was initially a > conscious decision to allow for faster development while addressing the lack > of manpower. But that is about to change once we complete port to Qt library. > We already transitioned to Tkpath quite a while ago which allowed us to use a > full SVG-based canvas, so I have no doubt we will be able to do this again. > Once this is done, we won't have to circumnavigate exceptions Tk library > requires in order to be compliant with different platforms and I would argue > in turn that will result in faster development. So, if you are really > interested in pushing the development of non-vanilla pd I think you should > heed some of Jonathan's advice and look for ways how community can work > together in combining the "best of" and engaging developers and "developers" > alike who have shown dedication to the cause. But before that can be > accomplished, the community should consider agreeing on design choices. For > instance, pd-l2ork came into existence because it focuses on more nimble > development at the expense of potential loss of backwards compatibility (even > though after 4 years of development the only incompatibility we infatuated is > correcting buggy positioning of iemgui objects, which is cosmetic in nature) > because a good chunk of that compatibility stems from buggy implementations > that stuck around long enough that they became a part of the standard (e.g. > iemgui's buggy positioning of objects that are arbitrarily offset from their > x and y positions, as reported by the pd script), which is unfortunate. > > Best, > > Ico > > On Sep 23, 2014 9:21 AM, "Dan Wilcox" <[email protected]> wrote: > I disagree. Your example lists what? 2 more developers? I'm talking about > "developers" as in people working the C code, build scripts, tcl/tk etc aka > people who could, theoretically, help push out a new Pd-extended release. > True, we have plenty of people working on externals, but this is a problem > for someone who can go deeper. > > I still maintain that the number of low level developers to overall users > (non-developers) is relatively low. > > On Sep 23, 2014, at 6:00 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >> However, your description of the user/developer ratio doesn't ring true to >> me. There's actually a surplus of developers and development energy-- I >> count two implementations of presets in the last year or two (in Pd-l2ork >> and the Chocolate et Coffee lib) which are in addition to however many >> already exist on svn and the Pd forum. > > -------- > Dan Wilcox > @danomatika > danomatika.com > robotcowboy.com > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > -------- Dan Wilcox @danomatika danomatika.com robotcowboy.com
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
