On Jan 7, 2009, at 4:59 AM, Steffen Juul wrote:
This is a follow up to the other mail on pd-list regarding the same. I think it makes sense to carry on on pd-dev, hence i just respond to this email.
On Wed, January 7, 2009 1:14 am, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
If anyone is ready to join in, there are many things that people could work on:
internationalization using msgcat and standard .po files
unified preference panel with tabs (like standard pref panes on
GNOME, Mac OS X, and Windows)
- flexible key binding code so that people can easily experiment with
all these ideas (this is started in pd_bindings.tcl)
restructure Pd window for cleaner UI and code
canvas scrollbar logic
and more....
Most of that is what i think is new features (more then it is restructuring). So that explains the confusion.
Let me ask: How easy will it be to merge this work into (vanilla) pd-0.42-x?
- I was thinking that if there was done a restructure (my
definition) then adding the new (gui) features of 0.42-x into that wouldn't be that much work. But adding them and merging new features within the restructure might be in my head/imagination.
My concern is that i hope for these things to end up in vanilla, hence i was thinking that restructuring and getting up to speed with vanilla would help with that. Given the restructure was accepted by Miller it would then also be much easier for him to take or not take changes. And as a bonus also easier for anyone to take or not take changes (ala distribution idea behind f.x. Git).
I hope this doesn't seam like ranting. It is intended as an honest and constructive input.
That aside. Just making sure: This devel branch is branching of vanilla 0.41-4 and the only focus is the gui (as opposed to also merging devel-0.39 features)?
Best, Steffen (trying to navigate to the pref panel code)
Since I know the 0.41.4 code, that's where I started, but yes, the goal is to write something that Miller would accept. I'll check out the 0.42 code for relevant changes once I get a chance. So I am hoping for feedback from Miller and this list so that is likely to happen. We discussed this at LAC2008, and I am going on what Miller said then, which is that it would make the most sense to rewrite things, then Miller would take the whole file.
That said, I think getting more participation from other devs would also help this goal. Right now things are structured as I have been coding, but more contributions will only improve the organization and code.
I think we should start having some dev meetings about this on #dataflow. I'll happily also do audio/video conferencing for those like me who like higher bandwidth communication. Chun mentioned going out of town, so perhaps we should wait for him to come back. My schedule is pretty flexible at the moment, how about a dev meeting this weekend?
.hc