[PD] ipoke~ ?

katja katjavetter at gmail.com
Tue Jul 3 10:23:16 CEST 2012

Julian, it is a good idea to first ask P.A. to share the code among a
small group and discuss licence, naming and maintainance matters. I am
still not back home (this mail is typed from a tourist office), but in
one week I will be ready to join in fully.

cheers, Katja

On 6/28/12, Julian Brooks <jbeezez at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
> So, after re-reading the thread I guess we're at the point where some
> [iPoke~] source would be helpful.
> It would seem that there is still two possible approaches for the
> [tabwrite4~] option (A & B), plus some still to be resolved issues such as
> mixing/overwriting which presumably could be user-settings/options
> dependent on the proposed usage e.g. modelling a moving source vs looping
> software which are two very different practical issues.  Right?  I would
> certainly be in favour, if it makes communal sense, to have one object
> which could do both and, as of yet, other unforeseen things.
> Perhaps too a reasonably straight port of [iPoke]? would be a good first
> project to get this moving towards the proposed [tabwrite4~] or is part of
> the problem that currently within Pd [iPoke~] is just not doable?
> BTW, my 2-penneth, etc etc - naming wise, if we have hit upon something
> which appears to be a fundamental lack from within current Pd I have to
> admit to having a slight reservation on encroaching upon Miller's naming
> strategy, i.e. would we be bagging something which he would prefer to keep
> open for himself?  It is a damn good name.
> Below is a first draft to P.A., please amend/contribute/re-write/leave as
> you see fit:
> Dear P.A.,
> Thank you for the kind offer to make the source code of your Max/MSP
> external [iPoke~] available for a port to Pd.
> The source code will be shared amongst a small group of interested and able
> Pd coders who have been contributing to a discussion on the Pd-list ('[PD]
> ipoke~?') working towards a proposed new object (current working title
> [tabwrite4~]).  Porting [iPoke~] and being able to understand how you have
> managed to resolve some of the issues we currently face (with all due
> credit), would be fundamental towards attempting to solve this very
> interesting conundrum.
> Currently we have not discussed some of the various important practical
> issues such as licensing and who and where this new object would be
> maintained.
> Our first aim would be to create a robust and cross-platform [iPoke~] which
> would submit to all of our high standards.
> It has been suggested that in keeping with a strategy of clear and open
> communication we keep this discussion 'on-list' so please feel free to
> respond in kind, or not.
> Very best wishes and look forward to hearing from you soon.

More information about the Pd-list mailing list