[PD] software license for pd general patch?

[João Pais]

> Those are really not the only examples I could give, but I don't think
> it's necessary to give more. The 5% is irrelevant... many projects go
> through that... and neither yours nor mine are the biggest free projects
> to do so. There are methodologies that even expect all code to be in
> potential transience, over and over... « if it's useful, it's bound to be
> replaced ».

that sounds right. but my point was to say that the main cause for me to  
prepare the patch was for others to use it, not me. and so, there are many  
more concerns with features, ease of use, comprehensible syntax for the  
score, ...
the chances of me having gotten to the same final result if I had done the  
patch just for myself are really below 1%, I would say. of course I can't  
give hard evidence on this number :)


>> without counting on much of the effort put in just to (try to) make it
>> usable by anyone - like having four possible spoken languages (and
>> several are already on the list to be added later).
>
> Ok, that really sounds like a feature of a commercial software, unless...
> what's the total duration of the soundtrack in each language ? Were any  
> of
> them made by other people for the good of the project ?

each soundtrack has the numbers 0-100, 200, 300, ... until 1000. maybe  
something else as well, don't remember. the numbers are all aligned per  
second in an audio file, they're read from the disk in realtime.
I did the one in portuguese (and probably will ask someone else to redo  
it, my diction isn't very crisp), native speakers did other languages -  
and more speakers are already ligning up to record other languages. it  
doesn't take much to record those numbers, they just have to sit down and  
speak them calmly and separated. it takes me much more time to align them  
in time.
(the speakers' names are in the patch)


>> which seems to pay off, someone said he just learned the syntax in a
>> couple of minutes, and in 15m had put in his whole piece (not a big one,
>> though).
>
> Now, how can you use word-of-mouth to attract potential contributors ? If
> you can get other contributors, you can get more value for yourself (in
> non-money terms), which is something you can count in trying to make the
> project be more worth your time for yourself. But it's more difficult to
> do that in the Pd world than outside of it.

I didn't understand your un-agreement with this. if someone that's not a  
pd user can learn how to use the software /score syntax with no big  
problems, that's good news. the word-of-mouth are in this case are reports  
 from "real musicians", who used the software in real situations -  
rehearsals, concerts, ... That's proof that the patch works, and can be  
used by the "general user". isn't that the best way to attract support?


> So, if you knew that from the start, why did you choose to work for those
> people for free in the first place ?

I chose to work for free because if I would have waited for $$ to come  
before I would work on the idea I had, we wouldn't be having this  
discussion now, I would still be sitting and waiting. I didn't do this as  
a request from someone, it was to fulfill what I saw as a gap in the  
modern classical music world. now that I've reached a solid first step, I  
am going to try to find $$ to make me continue to work - and hence all the  
discussion about what license to take, etc.