On 13 Mar 2006, at 23:15, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Well, I guess I misunderstood what should go in imports, and maybe I do have objections: I thought, "imports" was to be intended for libraries, that are required by Pd externals and maybe Pd itself, but not for standalone applications independent from Pd, as the DSSI plugins are? The DSSI folks have their own Sourceforge project, they have their own release system, and their applications are not required to run Pd at all.
I don't necessarily agree with that. Perhaps 'imports' isn't the right word, but the fact that a library isn't required to run Pd at all might not be a good enough reason not to include it in an extended build system, especially if it is kept completely apart from the main tree.
I would rather see apt or fink-style dependency resolution, but I think hc's compromise of separating concerns and letting people ignore 'imports' if they want to/need to seems fair enough. I would rather see it built, than stop here on principle.
d -- David Casal Researcher, Department of Computing Goldsmiths College, University of London Office : +44 020 7078 5151 Mob : +44 07803 173959