[PD] netpd on pd-extended

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at eds.org
Thu Jan 17 04:11:11 CET 2008


I agree in that I don't think netpd should be included in Pd- 
extended.  It's an application in its own right, so it makes sense to  
keep it separate.  What would make sense is to make libraries out of  
netpd functionality and include that in Pd-extended.

For example, it would be awesome to have a generic chat client, or  
even better, an IRC client, included in Pd-extended.  Then netpd  
could use that same one, and it could also be used to open chat rooms  
from the Help menu.


On Jan 16, 2008, at 8:37 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:

> yo hi
> i try to explain how i see things, comments are still welcome, of
> course. i am busy with my diploma project these days, so i might  
> not be
> accurate in every detail and i probably won't find time to work on  
> netpd
> for the next few months.
> i don't think that netpd should be delivered with pd-extended for
> various reasons:
> - netpd writes files. this wouldn't work inside the application  
> itself,
> because at least on unix based system (and probably also in windows
> since vista) a user doesn't have write access to where applications  
> are
> installed. this means, that netpd wouldn't work out of the box, but  
> the
> user would be forced to edit some configuration files, so that netpd
> knows where to find patches/ and abs/ directories (which would need to
> be created by the user) -> too much user work involved to setup netpd.
> - hans (or someone else with more expertise in project management  
> than i
> have) might want to correct me, if i am wrong, but i assume, that the
> maintenance would become more difficult, since the structure of how
> netpd would be implemented directly in pd-extended (all applications
> inside the application, custom patches and abstractions outside) would
> differ from the very simple layout that netpd has right now  
> (everything
> in a directory 'netpd' somewhere in the home of the user).
> - i still consider netpd to be in some sort of a beta stage. though  
> its
> working and usuable, there are still some issue left, that need to be
> solved. for a user updating netpd would be a pain, if some parts of it
> are inside the pd-extended application. downloading a new archive of
> netpd extracting it over the existing netpd installation is much
> simpler.
> however, my goal (at least what i would like to achieve) is to make
> netpd work with any flavour of pd, especially with pd-extended, out of
> the box. this has become possible mainly because of the  
> introduction of
> the [declare] objectclass in pd. however, the bad news are, that  
> miller
> seems to be unsure about the correct way, how [declare] should work  
> when
> used inside abstractions. he announced in the pd-dev list, that he  
> plans
> to just disable [declare]'s inside abstractions in pd-0.41. at this
> point, it's not quite clear, how this is going to affect netpd, but if
> not only the '-path' flag are disabled, but also the '-sdtpath' flag,
> then netpd-patches couldn't just simply declare their own dependencies
> anymore (custom netpd-patches are technically abstractions inside
> _creator.pd), but depedencies need to be declared beforehand (in the
> pd-settingsfile, as with old versions of netpd). this definitely would
> conflict with my plans to get rid of the authority of predefining a  
> set
> of dependencies. at least with pd-0.40 of any flavour, netpd-patch
> developers have the freedom to declare any dependency they want and
> their patches will work on any system out of the box, where those
> dependencies are installed. with pd-0.41 we might have to turn back  
> to a
> more monarchic system again.
> as long as such (severe) issues in pd aren't solved, i wouldn't  
> want to
> have netpd included in pd-extended.
> roman
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:13 +0100, Enrique Erne wrote:
>> hi list
>> i'm testing netpd on pd-0.40.3-extended-20080114.app on ppc osx  
>> 10.4.11,
>> although some synths are missing an object i think it's quite  
>> usable atm.
>> the first problem i ran into was
>> touch ~/Library/Preferences/org.puredata.pd.plist
>> emptied the plist but didn't remove it. so it didn't load zexy and
>> maxlib, which is necessary for netpd to start and load the _chat.pd.
>> removing the ~/Library/Preferences/org.puredata.pd.plist manually did
>> solve the issue. i guess when there is no org.puredata.pd.plist it  
>> takes
>> the one inside the app. couldn't it be default anyway that it takes
>> plist inside the app? and when i think further couldn't it be the  
>> same
>> file/syntax on all OS?
>> then.. most netpd-patches worked in my testing session. a few synths
>> couldn't load some externals like iem_t3_lib or <~ from zexy.
>> unfortunately quite a few patches have this error
>>   <~
>> ... couldn't create
>> bon-drummer.pd
>> bon-minidrm.pd
>> bon-blip.pd
>> bon-plucker.pd
>> (the never bon-* synths all use vline and work nicely)
>> t3_bpe
>> ... couldn't create
>>   t3_line~ 0
>> ... couldn't create
>>   t3_del 5
>> ... couldn't create
>>   t3_bpe
>> ... couldn't create
>>   t3_delay 5
>> ... couldn't create
>>   t3_sig~
>> ... couldn't create
>> fat-ass.pd - although i have never ever heard the sound of this  
>> synth,
>> afaik it was a license issue linux-olny.
>>   blosc~ syncsaw
>> ... couldn't create
>>   blosc~ comparator
>> ... couldn't create
>>   blosc~ syncsaw
>> ... couldn't create
>>   blosc~ comparator
>> ... couldn't create
>> while testing on pd-extended i wanted to ask if there are any  
>> objection
>>   to put netpd (one day, maybe this year) into pd-extended. roman  
>> what
>> do you think?
>> and if yes... how about people could add their netpd-patches to
>> pd-extended/netpd/patches?
>> eni
>> _______________________________________________
>> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ 
>> listinfo/pd-list
> ___________________________________________________________
> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http:// 
> messenger.yahoo.de
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ 
> listinfo/pd-list


Computer science is no more related to the computer than astronomy is  
related to the telescope.      -Edsger Dykstra

More information about the Pd-list mailing list