[PD-dev] updating 'puredata' package to 0.42.5

[Chris McCormick]

Hi Hans!

Let me prefix this by saying I think you and everyone else are doing great work
with pd-extended.

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:19:45AM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>
> On Nov 21, 2009, at 12:03 AM, Chris McCormick wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 03:02:14AM +0000, Chris McCormick wrote:
>>
>> 1. Pd is minimal whilst pd-extended is maximal. Hans has stated on  list
>> that he would like to include as many externals as possible in the
>> distribution. I think this is a bad architectural decision which leads to
>> complexity  and bugs.  I would rather run something which has an
>> architecture I agree with.
>
> Just like to throw in my two cents since I am mentioned by name ;)  I  may
> have said that years ago, but that is definitely no longer the case and
> hasn't been for years.  We really should be working towards a  common, simple
> library format so we don't need to include so much stuff in a single package.

Ok! I am obviously behind the times. Sorry about that. I guess it's still the
case that at this point in time it is included in a single package, but very
nice to hear that you are moving towards something more modular. I should note
that Pd itself is not very modular in terms of the way it's distributed, it's
just that there is not a lot of stuff in it.

>> 2. pd-extended has not yet earned my trust as a software project. I  have
>> been using Pd for a few years, and it has earned my trust. There are many
>> things which Miller has not implemented which I wish he had, but there are
>> far fewer things that he has implemented which I wish he hadn't.
>
> If you do find problems please do let us know.

I will, thanks for the invitation. This is one of the great things about
pd-extended, that the development is so public and open. I am looking forward
to the day when pd-extended fits my needs and I can begin to trust it when I
use it more.

>> 3. Hans is the leader of the pd-extended project, and I disagree with many
>> of his technical decisions. I don't trust him to make technical decisions as
>> much as I trust Miller. This may be outweiged down the track by
>> evolutionary pressure, since pd-extended will be subjected to a lot more
>> pressure  than Pd will be, because Pd basically has a sole maintainer. For
>> me this is  the biggest thing going for pd-extended - it is properly exposed
>> to the  evolutionary pressures of the Free Software community.
>
> Funny, I never wanted to be a leader of this, I'd much prefer it if more
> people were involved in the work and the decision making.  And  thankfully,
> I'm not the only one who works on it.  Others have  contributed a lot as
> well.

Of course, and you are doing a neccessary job and I think a lot of people
appreciate it, especially people who just want to get something working fast on
their platform, and need the functionality of some externals but can't compile
them.

>> 4. I often want to run Pd on constrained devices and in constrained  places.
>> Getting it to do so is hard enough without the bloat that pd-extended
>> experiences. What if I want to apt-get install Pd onto my router/
>> gumstix/phone with an ARM based processor with 8MB of flash memory?
>
> I often to that as well.  You should see how many python libraries are
> available for embedded devices.  Many many.  Just because a library is
> sitting there on the disk doesn't mean you have to use it.  But it does meant
> that you _can_ use it.

I guess the difference is that when disk space is constrained I have the option
to install or not install something with Python, whilst I don't really have
that option with pd-extended. If you do an `apt-cache search python-` you will
see a ton of stuff that you can optionally install. I think the Python VM and
language strike the right balance with what hey choose to be 'batteries
included' and what they leave out. Possibly pd-extended still needs to find
that balance.

> All that said, I like the forkiness of Pd and think its a strength. I don't
> think everyone should use Pd-extended, or whatever.  Its kind of ironic maybe
> that this thread started with me talking about doing pd- vanilla maintenance
> :).

Yes, I agree. Choice is good. Also, that irony is not lost on me! I would
really appreciate having someone dedicated to updating vanilla Pd in Debian. I
must apologise for always contributing words rather that code or action, which
is what you do for the benefit of us all.

Cheers,

Chris.

-------------------
http://mccormick.cx