[PD] managing freeframe and frei0r plugins WAS: pidip

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

The One Install Folder to Rule Them All makes it very easy to install stuff.
Separate folders would be messy in a different way, then we'd need folders for:

externals
abstractions
gui plugins
loaders
fonts
sound files
video files
textfiles
freeframe
frei0r
effectv
etc.

If you want a 'freeframe' folder, I say make one in your project and add it
using [path] or [declare -path].

.hc

On 02/07/2013 01:25 PM, me.grimm wrote:
> pix_freeframe will load a plugin if it in the standard Pd path ... yes
> 
> BUT thats kind of messy no?
> 
> my ideal solution would be all freeframe (and frei0r) plugins would be
> in a folder called "freeframe" and "frei0r" respectively in the
> standard path.
> 
> i have always, when building a project, just put freeframe plus in my
> project folder and used [declare] but i think for beginer students,
> for example, haveing a folder in std path would make more sense...
> 
> but i wonder can a single object declare a new path when initialized
> such as pd-extended/freeframe without the actual use of [declare] in a
> patch or when pd is started? idk...
> 
> m
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> wrote:
>>
>> I don't use any of this stuff, but I'm happy help make it easy to use plugins.
>>  I imagine that pix_freeframe and pix_frei0r search the standard Pd path for
>> plugins, or if not, could be made to without too much work.
>>
>> What are the particular issues there?
>>
>> .hc
>>
>> On 02/07/2013 01:02 PM, me.grimm wrote:
>>> if we take into account:
>>> pix_freeframe (it would be nice/easy if when initiaized it looked in
>>> pd's standard path for a "freeframe" folder maybe?)
>>> pix_frei0r (same deal)
>>> glsl effects (i never did quite figure out an easy way to chain effects)
>>>
>>> but other than effects that could be accomplished with these, what else?
>>>
>>> im curious because i have only used pidip a couple of times but have
>>> always been able to find a way to do what i desired in gem... somehow.
>>>
>>> m
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Pagano, Patrick
>>> <pat at digitalworlds.ufl.edu> wrote:
>>>> It has a ton of effects that Gem does not have
>>>> There is not really a comparison. Gem does not compete so to speak because Gem does other things supremely well
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: pd-list-bounces at iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces at iem.at] On Behalf Of me.grimm
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 11:08 AM
>>>> To: Hans-Christoph Steiner
>>>> Cc: pd-list at iem.at; John Harrison
>>>> Subject: Re: [PD] pidip
>>>>
>>>> i would wonder. what does pidip got that gem does not?
>>>> and cant those things that it got that gem does not be added to gem via original gpl code?
>>>> why have more than one vid lib
>>>> at least in pdx
>>>>
>>>> m
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not aware of that.  Perhaps you're thinking about how pidip should
>>>>> all be GPL, since it is based on GPL code.  The GPL does not allow
>>>>> more license restrictions, and the pidip license does just that.  So
>>>>> that means that the GPL code included in pidip is still GPL, but the
>>>>> code that sevy contributed is under his license, and those two
>>>>> licenses conflict. So basically, pidip is not legal to distribute in
>>>>> binary form because of the conflicting licenses within itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whether you choose to ignore copyright law is your decision.  I am
>>>>> personally fine with people distributing pidip as its own thing and
>>>>> using it with any of my code as long as:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) the pidip distro is clearly marked as non-free
>>>>> 2) pidip is not bundled with my GPLed code (i.e. as part of
>>>>> pd-extended, pd-l2ork, etc.)
>>>>>
>>>>> .hc
>>>>>
>>>>> On 02/06/2013 11:44 AM, John Harrison wrote:
>>>>>> I thought there was an earlier version of PiDiP which was and could
>>>>>> be included with Pd-extended because it was released under an
>>>>>> acceptable/compatible license?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just be aware that pidip is not free software because it has clauses
>>>>>>> in its license that restrict what it can be used for.  Including
>>>>>>> pidip in your package means your package can no longer be legally
>>>>>>> distributed as binaries since the pidip license terms conflict with the GPL license terms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .hc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 02/06/2013 09:27 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
>>>>>>>> I just finished cleaning up both pdp and pidip libs to be fully
>>>>>>> auto-buildable
>>>>>>>> as part of pd-l2ork (including freenect, artoolkit, opencv, etc.).
>>>>>>>> There
>>>>>>> are a
>>>>>>>> number of packages you need to install from launchpad in order to
>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>> all the
>>>>>>>> externals to build. Stay tuned for the next release coming soon
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>> enhancements...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>>>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ____________________
>>>> m.e.grimm | m.f.a | ed.m.
>>>> megrimm at gmail.com
>>>> _________________________________
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
>