[PD] consolidate backward- and MaxMSP compatibility in Cyclone (was: Purpose of Cyclone)

Alexandre Torres Porres porres at gmail.com
Tue Dec 22 21:33:40 CET 2015


2015-12-22 17:58 GMT-02:00 Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com>:

> I find Fred Jan's maintenance reasonable because sticking with current
> behavior means 0% of patches in
> the wild will be negatively affected.  There's the possibility that his
> maintenance hinders Max compatibility for future
> patches, but this isn't something we can quantify.
>

There's a pretty straightforward and concrete example in discussion, so
it's quantifiable and not a matter of possibility. It's not a hunch about
future development, there's already a present issue regarding the
improvement for porting patches between Pd and Max. More than that,
opinions from maintenance have been stated that Max/Msp compatibility is
not supposed to be a concern anymore...

If you have the opposite hunch then do some data mining so that we can have
> a more meaningful discussion.
>

You're basically just trying to share your opinion (over mine, by the way)
that this should be the way to go... I think this is a meaningless
discussion as it is. I have a perfectly good reason to appreciate and hope
for the compatibility to Max/MSP in cyclone (being that its original
purpose) - but in order to make a case against your opinion, you've
provided an insane and unreasonable task...

And this is after me and others have suggested that this not about a
dilema, that we could meet halfway, more than once... this is in fact the
point of this thread, so this seems also like a pointless discussion to be
raised in here.

cheers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20151222/17902049/attachment.html>


More information about the Pd-list mailing list