[PD-dev] Adding stuff to pd-extended 0.39

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On May 27, 2007, at 6:26 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:

> Hallo,
> Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>
>> "branched-v0-39-2-extended" is the tag of the point where the branch
>> was made. "branch-v0-39-2-extended" (minus "ed) is the branch itself.
>>
>> For future reference, it's generally not a good idea to add code to a
>> release candidate.  It's not just about the stability of the objects
>> themselves, but of the whole package and any possible interactions.
>> I am ok with you adding this stuff now, as long as you are willing to
>> test them on all three platforms, or have people test them.
>
> I'm not able to test them, but it's just some abstractions (though
> it's 30 files, half of them help-files). It's okay to leave the newer
> objects out, but I also found, that some bugfixes I made to [list]-abs
> or RTC-lib are missing. I suppose similar things may also occur in
> other libraries. (Maybe it would be good to think about splitting
> pd-extended into smaller packages e.g. one for Pd itself, one for
> extensions, but of course that's a debatable issue.)

Bug fixes are good right now in the release candidate, new features  
are not.  As far as I know that is the definition of "release  
candidate", it seems to be standard practice, and it sounds like a  
good idea to me.

I think it would be a good idea to have most people distribute their  
libs separately, kind of like how Eclipse plugins are distributed.   
But there isn't the infrastructure in place yet to do that.  The  
funny thing is that originally, Eclipse plugins were all expected to  
be distributed separately.  But now, there are starting to be Eclipse  
distros that include lots of plugins that are all tested together as  
a package.

>> Otherwise, the Pd-0.40.2-extended builds are a good place for just
>> checking stuff in since those builds will get tested as it nears
>> closer to release.
>
> Aren't the autobuilds automatically build from HEAD? Then there would
> be no need for checking stuff in explicitly.

The auto-builds are built from the HEAD of MAIN and the head of the  
release branch everynight.  But just because it builds doesn't mean  
that everything works.  Testing is still very much necessary.  For  
example, Gem builds fine on Mac OS X, but currently there is no font/ 
text support.  I consider that a bug that should be fixed.

.hc

>
> Ciao
> -- 
>  Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev



------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
----

Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to  
realize his wishes.  Now that he can realize them, he must either  
change them, or perish.    -William Carlos Williams