[PD] initbang in vanilla (was Re: how to destroy/delete an object with dynamic patching?)
IOhannes m zmölnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Sat Oct 21 09:08:40 CEST 2017
On 10/20/2017 10:19 PM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> Though I mostly agree with you, I disagree with the notion that raising
> the same thing several times is necessarily a bad thing. I'm living in
> a country where the people directly vote about some decisions. We would
> live in medieval times still - so to speak - if we hadn't voted about
> the same thing many times. 10 years later, the (Pd-) world might have
> changed a bit and suddenly implementing [initbang] in Pd-vanilla is
> considered nice and pretty.. How can you know?
no sorry, that's not how it works.
while i totally agree on the general terms, this doesn't apply to the
the initbang discussion has *started* >10 years ago (for what it is
worth: this is when I first implemented it).
since then the issue was raised again and again.
1.5 years ago (see the post from miller that alex linked to) a decision
was made, which was greeted with an "EVERYONE WINS" by the community
(and i don't remember anybody objecting).
so what has changed in the last 20 months?
of course, we are living in a free world and you are free to raise your
concerns about any decision, even it has reached consensus a minute ago.
and if others don't want to get through all this again and again, they
free to blacklist your address.
though this is probably counterproductive on the long run.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Pd-list