question: should toys be part of Pd distribution?
karlmac at peabody.jhu.edu
Thu Feb 3 02:21:05 CET 2000
Well, from the response to this so far and from talking to my colleagues
that are interested in PD but still haven't taken the plunge, it seems
that nice integrated, ready to go binaries with all the goodies would be
welcomed. Perhaps what is needed is someone to compile all this stuff
for all the platforms into, to use the linux jargon, distributions. As
I have access to linux and windows with compilers and should have access
to an O2 soon (and have the time), I would be happy to do this if people
are interested. This way the individual packages can continue to be
mantained by their authors and released according to their own
schedules, but end users can get everything they want. Let me know.
Miller Puckette wrote:
> Hi Pd-ers,
> would it be more convenient for you if I integrated "toys" (the pitch
> tracker, expr, and other really useful things) as part of the Pd
> distribution? It would make the distribution grow by 150K or so...
> I'm raising the question because I'm writing a phase object for sampling
> (which someone suggested here a year or so ago) and want to put something
> in "soundfile-tools" in the pd distribution which uses the new object...
> it seems as if that would be a good reason to put "toys" in the distribution
> of Pd...
| Karl W. MacMillan |
| Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University |
| Network and Telecommunications Services |
| karlmac at peabody.jhu.edu |
| 410/659-8297 |
More information about the Pd-list