[PD] [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: Updated pd-extended

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at at.or.at
Thu Sep 25 16:40:57 CEST 2014

These are the kinds of work that needs to be done in Pd-extended:

* update the libraries to the latest version, and test them
* pull in relevant commits from pd-vanilla (you can't just pull them
  all in because vanilla does the GUI stuff differently, and Pd-extended
  has promised pixel-exact sizing on all platforms for a few releases now).
* fix platform-specific bugs
* finish splitting out all the core objects into standalone library (this
  is mostly done, that makes it a lot easier to keep pd-extended's core
  updated with pd-vanilla commits since all of the objects are a separate
  library that is taken directly from vanilla).

Code contributions are of course key.  For people who don't do C, another way
of getting work done is raising money to pay someone to do it.  I'm happy to
advise anyone who wants to take any of this on.  Feel free to ping me directly
to point me to threads here, since I don't check this list very often.


Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> I wish I knew something about coding to help out with its development :P I
> do care a lot about it though and wish I could help in some other way.
> I do see a few problems with extended, but they're basically related to
> some of the externals and libraries that sometimes do not work as they
> should, have bad and messy help files and are sometimes redundanct. If
> welcome, I could help sharing my thoughts and two cents about that, but I
> realize those are not actual bug fixes regarding the code, so it's not a
> priority on its to do list and issues for being updated to another release.
> Anyway, while were at it, what kind of work exactly do you mean someone
> would have to do? I suppose there is a great list of bug fixes just to keep
> it basically what it is. Given the context, I'm not assuming any big to do
> list for some new features agenda. But besidesthe bug fixes, how hard is it
> for someone to just update to the latest vanilla core?
> Well, since Pd is an open source project that relies on community effort,
> and this is the list of its main developers and users, I guess this is the
> place to talk about a collaboration and see if we can get Pd-extended's
> development
> to continue.
> I'd to help in any way I can.
> Cheers
> 2014-09-20 2:08 GMT-03:00 Billy Stiltner <billy.stiltner at gmail.com>:
>> i get u 2 obi hans kinobis mixed up
>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans at at.or.at>
>> wrote:
>>> IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>>>> On 2014-09-16 05:36, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
>>>>> as long as we're on the subject, I'm noticing this seems to be the
>>>>> biggest version difference, it's 3 generations behind (0.43
>>>>> extended vs 0.46 vanilla). My question is, next release would be
>>>>> 0.44 or would you be able to skip right to 0.46? If the idea is to
>>>>> follow the order and go to 0.44 next, why is it so important to
>>>>> stick to this sequence?
>>>> it is not. why do you think it is?
>>>> most likely the next release of Pd-extended (if that ever happens)
>>>> will be based on whatever Pd-version is current then.
>>>>> Moreover, what holds pd extended from being updated to the latest
>>>>> versions? Like the original question, would it be possible to just
>>>>> get the extra extended stuff and pack it around vanilla?
>>>> like in the original question: yes, for *most* externals this will be
>>>> possible. Pd (and PdX) has a pretty stable API/ABI (i'm saying *most*
>>>> because you never know; but i expect all externals to keep working).
>>>>> I understand this wouldn't be as simple as that, but you know what
>>>>> I mean...
>>>> actually, i don't.
>>>>> I wonder if the problem is that there is some "to do list" in the
>>>>> extended agenda that holds it development and update to the latest
>>>>> versions.
>>>> i'm an outsider to Pd-extended, so i'm not authorized to answer this.
>>>> however, my unauthorized answer is:
>>>> the "to do list" of the pd-extended agenda is the same as the todo
>>>> list of the one *single* person who only ever pushed the development
>>>> of PdX. and this person is currently occupied with earning money to
>>>> feed their family, so PdX-development has become a minor priority.
>>>> i guess that Pd-extended development never paid very well.
>>> That sums it up pretty well, thanks :) I'd love to see Pd-extended
>>> development
>>> continue, I have not given up on it, but my time is very limited for
>>> that.  I
>>> think of it more as an extended pause for my contributions.
>>> Really the only the preventing another release is someone doing the work.
>>> .hc
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

More information about the Pd-list mailing list