[PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots of new editing features

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:06 -0700, "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika at yahoo.com>
wrote:
> 
> --- On Thu, 7/7/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> wrote:
> 
> > From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
> > Subject: Re: [PD] Pd-extended 0.43 updates: lots of new editing features
> > To: "Ivica Ico Bukvic" <ico at vt.edu>
> > Cc: pd-list at iem.at
> > Date: Thursday, July 7, 2011, 5:33 PM
> > 
> > On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:39 +0200, "Ivica Ico Bukvic" <ico at vt.edu> wrote:
> > > > I ended up refactoring the magic glass and
> > highlighting code quite a
> > > > bit, I think there might be something worth
> > checking out.  As for
> > > > other bug fixes, it would be great to have them
> > in the patch tracker
> > > > so we can sort them out.  It would take me a
> > massive amount of time to
> > > > figure out what code changes are for what in
> > pdl2ork since there isn't
> > > > any version control (that I could find at least)
> > and it seems to be a
> > > > mix of 0.42 and 0.43 versions.
> > > 
> > > It's based off of 0.42.6 extended tree. As for
> > submitting patches, I've
> > > been doing this in the past. Alas, a good number of
> > them never got any
> > > attention which is not very encouraging.
> > 
> > If you look at the patch tracker, and filter on Closed
> > ones, you'll see
> > which ones get accepted.  Most do.  It takes a
> > lot of time to review
> > patches, so if they don't cleanly apply and build, then I'm
> > not really
> > likely to pursue it much further.  I've tried figuring
> > out patches like
> > that in the past, and it just takes too much time to try to
> > figure out
> > what's wrong, etc.  and it doesn't speak well of the
> > patch if it doesn't
> > past the first hurdle.
> > 
> > .hc
> 
> bugfix 3127123 Closed

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3127123&group_id=55736&atid=478072
Accepted with comments.  Am I missing something?

> bugfix 3110267 Open, no comments, no assignees
> patch 3077431 Open, comments, I emailed the cyclone author to ask if he's 
> ok with Ico's improvements...

No word from the upstream author of cyclone, he's not active anymore. 
The focus of the cyclone library is to be clones of Max/MSP objects. 
I'm not in a place to test that stuff, so I'm not likely to handle
patches for cyclone.  I don't really have a criteria to judge if its
correct, unless its a really simple bugfix.

> bugfix 3109768 Open, and I added a new comment (Note: the comment I added 
> is fixed in Pd-l2ork)

donno, haven't reviewed

> bugfix 3108513 Open, no comments

patch out of date, applies to 0.42 but not 0.43 

> * bugfix 3106837 Open, comments

commented: Looks worth including, but with GOP bugs, I'm currently
waiting to see what Miller is going to do with GOP restructuring before
tackling this stuff.  I still don't really have a grasp of the GOP code,
so I don't know what the repercussions of GOP-related patches are.  From
my experience, one little simple fix causes some weird behavior
elsewhere.

> bugfix 3106799 Open, comments, bug still exists (Note: fixed in Pd-l2ork)
> bugfix 3102512 Open, comments
> patch 1670440 Closed, accepted
> 
> If any of these didn't apply cleanly and didn't build, there's no comment 
> indicating so.

I haven't necessarily had time to review everything, nagging and poking
me is perfectly appropriate if you think I should review something.  And
anything assigned to Miller and reviewed positively by IOhannes I'm
going to defer any action on until Miller responds.

.hc

> 
> -Jonathan
> 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at iem.at
> > mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> >
>