[PD] Re: [PD-dev] pdogg hacks

Olaf Matthes olaf.matthes at gmx.de
Fri May 27 11:30:36 CEST 2005


rama wrote:
>>Over the years more and more bugs were fixed, new features implemented
>>and several things changed quite dramatically. After a while a user was
>>asking for Pd versions of oggcast~ and oggamp~ with some of the new
>>features (that were not in the pdogg versions) so I made a backport of
>>the new code to Pd.
> 
> 
> i would love you forever if you return to pd some day, i appreciate you
> work, and I'm using pdogg a lot (a lot!)

I really don't understand your point. It's extra work for me to make 
(and maintain) Pd versions of my Max externals. But as long as people 
don't like the fact that the Pd versions are released under the same 
license as the Max versions I should probably stop to do that at all.
I always thought it would be better to have a non-open external than no 
external at all. That way at least people who don't care whether they 
are allowed to read the source code can profit from it.

To be honest, one reason for me to use Max much more often than Pd (and 
a reason for developing for Max, not Pd) is the attitude of the users. 
Max users can accept the fact that not everything is free (as in beer or 
in freedom or both). (Sorry, I don't want to say that all Pd users in 
general can't do that, but there are a lot who pretend they can't.)
In the end this strict view on the open vs. closed debate is also bad 
for Pd because it prevents some things from being coded (or released) at 
all.

Olaf





More information about the Pd-list mailing list