gr at grrrr.org
Sun May 8 18:34:52 CEST 2005
> More opinions:
> I think that we don't need to rename the "devel_0_38" branch right
> away; it's not the right moment yet. But it should be done some day,
> and the new branch shouldn't have a version number in it. If needed,
> we will make subbranches of it for particular stable releases of our
Since have been using the devel branch regularly for nearly 2 years now
i have the impression that it's more usable and more stable than the
In my opinion Miller's vanilla PD is more like a development version in
the way that it introduces more fundamental changes to the structure,
while the devel branch normally just adds convience features.
I don't know what i have missed in the devel meeting but up to now
there was no indication that important features like SIMD code, low
latency callbacks and array update time will make it into Miller's PD
soon. Therefore i think it's important to have tarballs and binary
packages of the devel branch and i'm thankful to Tim to spend some time
I see no real importance of having another name, but if it helps
spreading the word, why not. How about "pure devil"?
> I also think that, to promote evolution of the PureData source code
> base, when Miller's 0.39 gets published, diffs between Miller's 0.38
> and 0.39 should be merged to devel_0_38, and not the other way around.
> This is especially important if there is more work being done on the
> non-Miller side than on the Miller side.
To my knowledge this has always been the case, no? Or maybe i don't get
what you want to say.
You are right, that the devel branch version has already become
obsolete due to the large amount of differences to the "stable" one.
all the best,
More information about the Pd-dev