[PD] (netpd)U(Pd-extended), Pd-ext bug-tracker (was Re: elitism, software and academia)

[Chris McCormick]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:17:57AM +0200, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> the question is: how should they be included? should they be included as
> they are now, with the gui and their dependency on the netpd-framework?
> or would it make more sense to strip everything off to get a working
> subset of abstractions, that can be used in a more flexible way? as far
> as i understand the concept of pd-extended as a collection of
> abstractions and externals (read: collection of tools/utility rather
> than a collection of examples), i'd vote for the latter, though that
> would involve a lot more work. 
> 
> i'd rather do not include the abstractions/patches myself and i'd rather
> do not make the decision on how they should be included. but i'd be
> willing to deliver stripped off abstractions with helpfiles from my own
> netpd-patches, so someone else could could include/organize them in
> pd-extended.

One thing that would be cool for us to come up with is some way to
abstract the core, and gui of abstractions separately in such a way that
they could be used in multiple different state saving/communication paradigms.

For example, if I could make one abstraction for the s-abstractions collection
and then have the user be able to choose whether it:
1. saves using sssad, has a GOP gui
2. saves using memento, has a GOP gui
3. integrates with netpd, has netpd style gui

This could just be a pipe dream, but then again I could never have imagined
someone creating something as amazing as netpd or sssad in Pure Data alone.

Best,

Chris.

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