On 10/19/2012 04:29 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
On 10/19/2012 08:21 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
That's good to have, please post and maintain that somewhere, like maybe in the 'osc' lib. But its not yet a replacement because at the very least its not deployed.
i honestly dunno what you mean here.
imho, if you want to make changes to the OSCx library, you should rather replace the externals with the patches i sent than replacing the autoconf stuff with template/Makefile and renaming the folder (obviously, once that is done there is exactly no reason to keep autoconf stuff so template/Makefile (or even a stripped down version if you think it too bloaded) is enough. this would "deploy" those objects to all PdX-0.43 installations (if this is what you mean by "deploy"). i figure, that the replacement patches have less bugs than the external versions.
starting yet another library doesn't make sense to me (esp. since the 2 objects are almost 100% compatible (the only thing missing is multicast-group support, and i wonder whether anybody uses that).
adding those patches to mrpeach/osc (if this is what you refer to as "the 'osc' lib) is imo not a splendid idea either, as mrpeach/osc is blissfully unaware of the transport layer. (if martin thinks differently, he should go and add those patches)
I'm not going to take on the maintenance of those patches, so just copying them into Pd-extended is not an option. I'm think Pd-extended should have an 'oscx' compatible library , and 'oscx' is already there, tested, etc.
If you want to write a replacement, then please do. But for it to be truly a replacement, it needs to be released properly, widely tested, etc.
.hc