On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Christian Klippel wrote:
karma is in no way a direct rewrite of jmax.
Ok, sorry about that one; however, you did say on jmax-list that you would fork jMax 2.5.x, and that wasn't so long before you started Karma.
do you want to imply that development of similar things is a bad thing?
No, what I mean is that Tim cannot say that pd-dev is a bad example in project management, without being himself part of the bad example. I didn't say that pd-dev is a bad example in project management
c'mon, we are in the open source world, so all this is supposed to be a good thing....
I'm not against competition at all, I'm just against being at the same time part of the competition and denouncing competition.
Pd-dev can't be a bad example in project management, because there is no project manager, and there is no way that a project manager could have authority over individuals because there is (almost no) incentive for individuals to obey. That's another way that Tim's statement on project management makes no sense.
just because you decided to make dd in c++, it doesnt mean that everything else in c++ is just a clone of pd now.
It doesn't matter which language it's written in, it's that if Tim is going to tell anyone that they don't care about what the others do, he should look at his own project first.
here i have to vote for tim: his system is fundamentally differnt from pd's core.
Reading the specification, most of what I read could equally apply to Pd and MAX, and most of the rest of the things that I read are features that have been thoroughly discussed on pd-dev and pd-list as possible additions to pd and are not impossible to add while keeping near-total compatibility.
So, I can't believe that it's "fundamentally different".
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada