On 03/02/2017 06:37 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: > 2017-03-02 6:13 GMT-03:00 Roman Haefeli <reduz...@gmail.com>: > >> >> I thought those are meant to be transitional >> packages that don't receive any further maintenance. > > > What do you mean? Some packages are being updated and have newer versions, > some are abandoned and only have this version from the last *pd-extended* > up there... but they're not all meant to be either in one group or another, > and basically anyone can work on an abandoned library and update/upload a > new version...
i don't see how this workflow is hindered by the current state of affairs. > > Well, if they differ in version, it's good to know which version it is, if > it's a newer version, an older version, the same version... I think it's > really confusing if you do not know the version at all... you just can't > compare! And you have to understand that most people looking at it cannot > really grasp the idea that the package is "from the last extended package" > - you can see the question from David as an example... the idea is very simple: any package that gets uploaded, should have a version that is higher that "0.0extended". if they have a higher version number, then deken will sort them *before*. the idea of deken is really: the very first link should be the version you are looking for. all other links are either outdated versions or for different architectures. any library that is maintained (as in: there is enough interest in it that someone wants to do a fresh upload) *should* have a version number attached to it. (even if it is just a date-based version). practically all libraries *will* have a version that is higher than 0.0extended. > > Anyway, seems that deken can take any kind of information and display it. I > get it that it's nice to have a clue that it's from extended, so, instead > of "v0.0.extended" why not give it a proper version and also explicitly say > it's from pd extended? Example suggestion; > > instead of "*cyclone-v0-0extended*", > it could be "*cyclone-v0.1alpha56-pd-extended*" > > would that be worse somehow? > what's the point of adding "pd-extended" when you have a proper version anyhow? but i think what roman tried to say is, that your energy could be spent much better by uploading updated libraries into deken (with their correct versions set), than beating a dead horse. and if there are no updated versions, then there are no version numbers to compare anyhow. fg,mrda IOhannes
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
