On Nov 5, 2010, at 7:01 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote:

On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 19:10 -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 00:51, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> wrote:

As for packaging pd-arraysize together with other things, as far as I
know, it is not Debian practice to lump together different upstream
projects into a single package, I don't think its a good idea here

It is perfectly acceptable, although not common. If there are more pd
objects that are small, then just bundle them together.

I just happened to read on the pd-list, that [arraysize] is actually
obsolete, since this functionality is already built into both puredata
and pd-extended: [expr size("$s1")]

Personally, I don't see a point in supporting double functionality. And
since this library doesn't do anything else, I'd actually prefer to
completely disregard it. I don't think that keeping it alive solely for the sake of not breaking existing patches with future Debian version is a good reason, especially since fixing those patches is so easy. In this
case I value tidiness of the pd-lib space more than backward
compatibility. Better not adding it in the first place than removing it

I'm interested to hear other opinions on this.


pd-arraysize is a special case, not an example of how to do things. There are plenty of simple packages in Debian, like simple kernel modules for a very specific device. In general packaging a single simple object not a good idea, IMHO, but this one has a long legacy.

arraysize has many uses, and is still widely used by people in their patches, I use it regularly. It is also widely used in many Pd docs. And many people prefer the simple syntax of typing "arraysize" vs "expr size($s1)". Additionally, expr is GPL and arraysize is public domain, so some people will use arraysize for that reason (i.e. a proprietary app based on Pd like rjdj).



Using ReBirth is like trying to play an 808 with a long stick. - David Zicarelli

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to