[PD] Cyclone future

IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig at iem.at
Tue Feb 23 21:32:26 CET 2016

On 02/21/2016 10:18 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> On 02/21/2016 08:35 PM, Fred Jan Kraan wrote:
>> This mail is the last I will write about cyclone in the foreseeable
>> future.
> this is about the worst possible outcome of the entire discussion.
>> There are serious plans to save Pure Data and cyclone by adding
>> numerous objects.
> what i don't understand is:
> what keeps people from creating a "typhoon" library that adds the
> additional objects?
> PS: and what is that "hurricane" library for?

after thinking some more about this, i think a sensible way to move
forward is for *both* forks of cyclone to change their names.

cyclone is krzysztof's library.
krzysztof is missing in action.
he has neither officially abandoned the library nor has he (to my
knowledge) authorized anybody to continue on his behalf.

i agree with chris that this is open source, and that forking is one of
the strengths of open source.
this doesn't mean though, that we should end up with 3 different
versions of the same software that are indistinguishable from outside
though different inside. in german we call this thing a "mogelpackung"
(a euphemism for fraud).

it doesn't really matter if everybody is only working with their best
intentions in mind. what does matter is, that the end-user is being mislead.

i therefore ask both fred and alexandre to change the name of their
library, so that they cannot be confused with both the original cyclone
library and with each other: neither of the forks is an (or /the/)
"official" fork.
for what it is worth, git makes it easy to incorporate changes between
forks (using pull requests, cherry picking,...) even if the names are

keep both names similar to cyclone if you want to, so that it is
possible to see their relation.

i still think that "hurricane", "tornado", "typhoon" and "windhoos" are
good candidates.


PS: of course i am in no position to tell you what to do, but i do think
this is a good opportunity to find a "best practice" forking model in
the Pd world.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20160223/74b1c944/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list