Em qui., 28 de mai. de 2020 às 21:51, Alexandre Torres Porres < [email protected]> escreveu:
> That particular PR is closed and is now replaced for a cleaner one, see > https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/1037 > > I only have documentation updates in it for things that are already in Pd, > so it's just fixing documentation issues, adding missing information, > adding examples, and mentioning new functionalities. That would have to be > looked into even if this was just a "0.50-3" bug fix release ;) > not to hijack the issue, what I have to say about the updates I made is that what needs for carefulness and discussion is that last two commits, where I'm pressuring we change the way we make an example on how to use slop~ to report peak level, and also changes to out1~ abstraction. One other thing is that I made some changes in the other help files and I put "updated for 0.51-0" but not because the object itself changed. Let me explain, I'm using examples where I can now use a backslash in a message box to escape a space symbol. This wasn't working in Pd 0.50-2, it's a bug that just got fixed, before Pd wouldn't save the backslash in the message box. Anyway, I thought this did count for an update for 0.51-0 because this couldn't be done before. But I'm not sure this is good as it might lead people to believe the object itself changed. I don't really know what's the policy for this "updated for" warnings, do they reflect that only the object changed or also if the documentation went though a major overhaul? cheers >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
