On 5/8/24 18:49, Miller Puckette wrote:
I couldn't immediately figure out how to fix the ugly Makefile.am stuff, and anyway the whole thing feels fragile to me. What if we change PD_VERSION_CODE to PD_CODE_VERSION ? Will that cause anyone trouble?
i see you renamed the define. however, the recent changes accepted by you already fixed the parsing issues we were having, so the version in 1.introduction.txt was replaced correctly.
all in all i do not see a reason to use PD_VERSION_{MAJOR,MINOR,BUGFIX} on one hand, and on the other PD_CODE_VERSION version.
the meaning of PD_VERSION_CODE is really "a single code(number) expression the (entire) version of Pd", and belongs into the same family as PD_VERSION_MAJOR ("a single (code)number expression the major version of Pd"). having PD_VERSION_MAJOR and PD_CODE_VERSION adds additional mental load that i would rather avoid.
I now see that the correct action from me (and dan) would have been to both object the rename and propose a fix. rather than just propose a fix (and assume that this would obsolete the rename). sorry for the inconvenience.
gfdmsar IOhannes