[PD-dev] Re: PD-cvs Digest, Vol 21, Issue 30

[Tim Blechmann]

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 11:09 -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> Since Matju has stated that desire is a fork, I think it would be  
> most beneficial to all of us, including the desire people, if it used  
> its own repository.  

do you want to restrict their access to the pd cvs? what would be the
benifits of a desire repository for the dd devs? and for the pd devs
(well, taking into account, that miller doesn't use the cvs for his
development works)? wasn't the initial purpose of the pd sf repository a
way to avoid duplicate developments (i'm really curious, as i haven't
been involved with pd at that time)? 

> pd-devel is already pretty far afield for being  
> a branch, 

but pd-devel is still allowed to stay in the sf cvs? 

> it seems to have many changes that are never intended to be  
> merged into the main.  

come on, this has been overdiscussed in the past... i guess everyone can
read about everything on this in the pd-dev archive of the last two
years...

i don't really care if vanilla/devel/desire are forks, branches, use the
same repository or different ones, or if the developers work together,
against each other, or don't care what they are doing, but there is a
really interesting article about 'floss developers as a social
formation' (http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_11/lehmann/index.html).

cheers ... tim

ps: hans, please don't mind my grumpy mails ... we owe each others a few
bottles of beer/glasses of wine, though :)

--
tim at klingt.org    ICQ: 96771783
http://www.mokabar.tk

A paranoid is a man who knows a little of what's going on.
  William S. Burroughs
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20061129/e6584f2f/attachment.pgp>