On Dec 16, 2005, at 4:28 AM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
Staying in sync sounds good to me. But I think that since portaudio/portmidi are not stable APIs and still alpha/beta code, we should maintain a copy in CVS.
what? the portaudio api's 1 and 2 are perfectly defined, there is absolute no need to keep a copy ...
That is far from the only reason to keep a copy in
portaudio/midi is fairly stable and not under particularly active development now that it supports everything people actually use like coreaudio alsa and mme/ds/asio - i wouldnt classify it under alpha/beta status even v19.. anyways it's a seperate project and should not be in the pure-data CVS, it has its own..
don't agree either ... portaudio is still under development ... portaudio v19 isn't fully implemented, yet ... but if you classify pd to be late alpha, then portaudio 19 is late beta ...
Show me a release. A CVS snapshot is not a release. The portaudio people apparently think its not beta yet since there is no release. I'll take their word for it.
In any case ... if we keep the portaudio/midi sources in the cvs, i'd propose to add the alsa and the jack sources, too. of course the next step would be to add the asio-sdk, which would result in some legal problems, but you can't build pd with portaudio/asio on windoze without this sdk...
It would be good to have ASIO in there, but yes, the license does not allow it. As for Jack and ALSA, there are releases. ALSA is past 1.0, so its silly to compare it. Plus, I think that the Debian, RedHat, Fink, etc. etc. packages work much better than keeping the source in CVS. You cannot get portaudio 19 packages from Debian, RedHat or Fink (though perhaps from other sources).
.hc
________________________________________________________________________ ____
"Computer science is no more related to the computer than astronomy is related to the telescope." -Edsger Dykstra