[PD-dev] packaging the pddp docs

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at at.or.at
Tue Jun 28 17:11:05 CEST 2011


On Jun 28, 2011, at 12:55 AM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:

>
>
> --- On Tue, 6/28/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> wrote:
>
>> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
>> Subject: Re: [PD-dev] packaging the pddp docs
>> To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika at yahoo.com>
>> Cc: pd-dev at iem.at
>> Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011, 6:27 AM
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2011, at 6:45 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Mon, 6/27/11, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
>>>> Subject: [PD-dev] packaging the pddp docs
>>>> To: pd-dev at iem.at
>>>> Date: Monday, June 27, 2011, 9:21 PM
>>>>
>>>> Now that the core Pd docs (i.e. /usr/lib/pd/doc/*)
>> are
>>>> split out into a
>>>> separate Debian package, I think it could make
>> sense to
>>>> package the PDDP
>>>> docs in a kind of mirror or replacement package.
>>>> Something like
>>>> pddp-doc.  Jonathan, in particular, I was
>> thinking
>>>> that since you have
>>>> wanted to work on all the patches there, we could
>> set it up
>>>> so the
>>>> pddp-doc package mirrors the whole
>> /usr/lib/pd/doc*
>>>> directory and patch
>>>> structure, have this in SVN, git, or whatever
>>>> somewhere.  Then people
>>>> could choose the pddp-doc package if they so
>> choose.
>>>
>>> The PDDP docs I did are all for vanilla objects
>> (exceptions are
>>> expr family, and the other "vanilla" extras).  If
>> a new user clicks
>>> "Help" on a vanilla object, it should show the revised
>> PDDP help
>>> patch by default.
>>>
>>> So instead of what you propose, please make something
>> like a
>>> legacy-vanilla-help package.  That way, if
>> someone really prefers
>>> the old docs, they can still find them, and we won't
>> waste new users' time
>>> by forcing them to use outdated and unmaintained docs
>> (until they figure
>>> out they're supposed to download a separate package
>> for the current
>>> vanilla help patches, which nobody has to do for any
>> of the external
>>> packages).
>>>
>>> -Jonathan
>>
>>
>> I agree that the PDDP docs are much better, that's why I
>> want to get them out there more.  Part of packaging is
>> representing the upstream as it is and letting the user
>> decide.  So I think it makes sense to keep puredata-doc
>> as what's included in the official tarball.  As for
>> Pd-extended, I think it should still use the PDDP docs, so
>> like you say, showing the PDDP docs by default.
>
> Ok.


So we just need a plan of attack.  If you can lead up this project, I  
will help as much as I can.  Do you want to include the whole docs  
tree in the doc/pddp SVN?  Or something else?  It seems to me the  
easiest would be to start a separate repository for them, like on  
SourceForge, pddp is available: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pddp

Or we could reorganize doc/pddp in the pure-data SVN.

.hc

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

Using ReBirth is like trying to play an 808 with a long stick.    - 
David Zicarelli





More information about the Pd-dev mailing list