[PD] versions of libraries from extended in deken (was Different versions of iemguts library in Deken)

Alexandre Torres Porres porres at gmail.com
Fri Mar 3 17:29:02 CET 2017

2017-03-03 6:01 GMT-03:00 <zmoelnig at iem.at>:

> machine readable format?

please explain what is and what do you mean by "machine readable format"?

2017-03-03 6:01 GMT-03:00 <zmoelnig at iem.at>:

> On 03-03-17 07:42, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> could just be "0.0.1" or something.
> how's that better than "0.0.extended"?

Well, how is it worse? And what would be better? It's hard to guess what is
your issue and address it, but I'll try to further discuss it anyway.

First, for the sake of being accurate and clear, it's "*0-0extended*" and
not "0.0.extended". So, are you suggesting a newer format? I'm guessing
not, anyway...

Now, continuing the ealier thinking in response to Fred. I now think the
"0.0.1" - as I had suggested - is weird cause I didn't find any library
released as such in extended (and it'd be quite unlikely to happen so,
right?). The smallest version number you can find is "0.1". So, instead of
"0.0.1 or something" I could now suggest just "*0.1*" (with no "or
something" anymore, "0.1" would be the "something").

But then, it's hard to debate cause I don't know where you're to get with
your question... I thought that "0-0extended" was just a cheap solution
because no one had volunteered to check their actual versions.

At least I hope it's clear why I think "0-0extended" is unfortunate,
confusing and unclear, specially in respect to other libraries available -
is it the same, newer, older? (I found duplicates, btw). We've had a
question about exactly that in a previous thread: "how does the 0-0extended
version of iemguts relate to the 0.2.1 available only for windows?". Now
there's an answer...

Even if "0-0extended" is the only option there, most of them have versions
that would just be good to know, without having someone dig through
"meta.pd" or something. And in the case there's no versioning, 0.1 seems
like a good place to start, and it would have made it easier fro Fred to
work on an update of "tof", for instance.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20170303/7fc92ba3/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list