On Feb 17, 2007, at 5:32 PM, Eric Lyon wrote:


 the (future SVN) repository a bit
differently: A "default member" would just get write access to one
(SVN) directory. Then e.g. Luke could put his abstractions and the
mmonoplayer and whatever comes up there, pd-extended could still
collect it. I guess this would be sufficient for a large number of
developers. (Many people recently added as members, like Eric Lyon
etc., "just" put their externals and abstractions there and all is
fine.)


I agree strongly with this. As an externals developer, I have no need or desire to have access to the Pd core code except as a spectator. One benefit of two-tiered access (1 for people working on core code, 2 for people like me) is that there would not need to be major discussion about adding externals developers, since you would not need to worry about them wandering into the Pd code and accidentally turning into Microsoft Word :)

I think the ideal structure would be a smaller and carefully tailored distro (unlike Pd-extended).  Then have a standard package format, and a way of managing many different packages, like Perl's CPAN, Eclipse plugins,  or Debian package management. 

Then each dev can manage their libs in their own repository, be in CVS, SVN, darcs, git, etc. etc.  They would just need to make releases in the standard package format, and perhaps upload them to a central repository.  That is why I have been working on the "libdir" format.

.hc



Cheers,

Eric



_______________________________________________
PD-dev mailing list
PD-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev



------------------------------------------------------------------------

All information should be free.  - the hacker ethic