[PD-dev] Refactoring Pure Data (2 of 2)

[Chris McCormick]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:00:20AM +0200, Vincent Lordier wrote:
> So it's basically up to Miller to let the development process change,
> so we can propose improvements.
> If not, then I guess I'll join the growing group of discouraged ones,
> eventually.

I think you have hit the nail on the head with this statement, Vincent.
The situation is such that Miller has a particular way of working
that doesn't include frequent CVS commits and doesn't include allowing
others to hack on the vanilla sourcecode. This is fine, and is infact
the way a lot of open source projects work; with a 'benevolent dictator'
- the linux kernel for example follows this model. The only way to get
something into the kernel is to submit a patch, just like Pd.

Miller seems to be a pretty busy person with things other than Pd and
although he has made efforts to adopt tools like CVS it seems unlikely
to me that he will find the time to change his entire development
methodology to suit every person on this list.

In short, I think that if people want to see changes to Pd they have two
choices to follow:

1. Follow the tried and tested method of other similar projects; read the
notes.txt file and start submitting patches that fix issues that Miller
wants fixed. We have seen Miller adopt many patches leading up to 0.40.

2. Whine a whole bunch and then fork the source code (and then hopefully
stop whining).

3. If people want new features added to Pd they can submit patches,
but they have to understand that as the leader of the project it is
completely Miller's right to reject patches that he doesn't want to see
as part of his vision of Pd. It should be noted that Linus (for example)
frequently drops patches completely silently. Not because he's an asshole,
but because there are more efficient ways for him to spend his time than
understanding and replying to every single wacky change to the kernel.

There have for example been several complaints about the tooltips patch
that never got submitted. Miller specified the exact reason that the
patch was not accepted:
<http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2005-09/004847.html>
It seems like he never provided a follow up answer to Tim's question of
how that they should be implemented, which is sad. I for one would be
really happy for Miller to provide a reply as to how tooltips can be
worked into his vision of Pd so we can all get that wonderful feature.

But everyone should also stop making indirect rude complaints about
it, and just write him an email on this list to ask him specifically
and politely. Let me do that now;

Miller; you rejected the tooltips patch that many people want to see
applied. What do we need to change to see that patch make it into Pd?

Hopefully your emails Vincent, which are much more balanced, positive,
and less accusatory than many others on this list will help Miller to see
that there is some call for more openness in the development of Pd, and
help others see that there is a way of working that is not so negative,
egotistical and demanding.

Best,

Chris.

-------------------
chris at mccormick.cx
http://mccormick.cx