Hallo devs!
Does it have any sense, that the following files are in the vbap cvs directory:
define_loudspeakers.pd_irix6 vbap.pd_irix6
If there are no objections I will remove them !
LG Georg
Hi Georg,
well, it is quite hard to compile externals for irix sometimes, so it could be nice to keep it...
just my three cents though....
lgP
* Georg Holzmann grhPD@gmx.at [2007-03-13 14:15]:
Hallo devs!
Does it have any sense, that the following files are in the vbap cvs directory:
define_loudspeakers.pd_irix6 vbap.pd_irix6
If there are no objections I will remove them !
LG Georg
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
Yeah, they aren't hurting anything, they've been there a looong time. So might as well keep them.
.hc
On Mar 13, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Peter Plessas wrote:
Hi Georg,
well, it is quite hard to compile externals for irix sometimes, so it could be nice to keep it...
just my three cents though....
lgP
- Georg Holzmann grhPD@gmx.at [2007-03-13 14:15]:
Hallo devs!
Does it have any sense, that the following files are in the vbap cvs directory:
define_loudspeakers.pd_irix6 vbap.pd_irix6
If there are no objections I will remove them !
LG Georg
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
Access to computers should be unlimited and total. - the hacker ethic
Georg Holzmann wrote:
Hallo Peter+Hans!
Yeah, they aren't hurting anything, they've been there a looong time. So might as well keep them.
Yes, but IMHO the cvs is not here for binaries ! (and then why only vbap?)
i agree with georg that they should be removed.
they should be zipped and put on the sourceforge release page though, so people can download them somewhere.
apropos: is it ok, if releases of single externals/libraries are put on the sourceforge release page? or is there some policy that would forbid that (e.g. only few people are allowed actually release managers; if they release only there packages (e.g. because they don't have time or energy to put other people's stuff online), this would make an bias towards their packages which does not reflect the aliveness of the CVS)
mfga.sdr IOhannes
Hallo, IOhannes m zmoelnig hat gesagt: // IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
apropos: is it ok, if releases of single externals/libraries are put on the sourceforge release page? or is there some policy that would forbid that (e.g. only few people are allowed actually release managers; if they release only there packages (e.g. because they don't have time or energy to put other people's stuff online), this would make an bias towards their packages which does not reflect the aliveness of the CVS)
Maybe we could borrow the externals binaries from Pd-extended and make an extra archive (the old "pd-externals") from that. Then people who want to use a Pd without the pd-extended features could still download all externals and install them as they like.
Ciao
On Mar 14, 2007, at 4:11 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Georg Holzmann wrote:
Hallo Peter+Hans!
Yeah, they aren't hurting anything, they've been there a looong time. So might as well keep them.
Yes, but IMHO the cvs is not here for binaries ! (and then why only vbap?)
i agree with georg that they should be removed.
they should be zipped and put on the sourceforge release page though, so people can download them somewhere.
apropos: is it ok, if releases of single externals/libraries are put on the sourceforge release page? or is there some policy that would forbid that (e.g. only few people are allowed actually release managers; if they release only there packages (e.g. because they don't have time or energy to put other people's stuff online), this would make an bias towards their packages which does not reflect the aliveness of the CVS)
It would be good to keep the sourceforge page uncluttered, and adding all these sections would make it much more cluttered than it already is. But I do think it's a good idea to post the binaries one a website and remove them from CVS.
How about puredata.info for random things that won't be regularly updated? There is the download wiki exactly for things like this.
.hc
mfga.sdr IOhannes
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
It would be good to keep the sourceforge page uncluttered, and adding all these sections would make it much more cluttered than it already is. But I do think it's a good idea to post the binaries one a website and remove them from CVS.
i don't think that this would clutter the sourceforge page. there is already a number of external packages in the download section, most of them seem to be unmaintained. (which kind of invalidates your argument about using "wiki for stuff that does not get updated on a regular basis")
the current sections are, in order of appearance: pd-devel (outdated? - last mid 2005) pd-extended (early 2006) pd-externals (OUTDATED - early 2003) pd-gem (early 2003) pd-osc (outdated - 2002) pure-data (uptodate - end 2006)
i believe, that this page would be more useful if there were lots of uptodate packages.
however, an example for an unstructured download page with lots(!) of packages (currently over 80!), is the plone-collective (projectname: "collective") found at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=55262 now this is _really_ a one-stop shop for loads of things. while the list is long, it is still managable to find what you need if you know what you are looking for. if you do not know what you are looking for, then everything with more than one package will get you lost.
i agree though, that the puredata download page could and should be structured (which it is currently not). since sourceforge orders packages alphabetically, one would just have to find a naming scheme, where: pd-vanilla is at the top, pd-extended is prominent too, pd-externals are grouped together (though distinguishable via package names!) somewhere below. pd-devel&desiredata could go next to pd-extended and pd-vanilla (if desired). i don't think that pd-devel/desiredata should go _before_ pd-vanilla and pd-extended.
so i would think of something like (annotations in ()) - pd - pd-extended - pd-external-ann - pd-external-osc - pd-external-zexy - pure-desiredata - pure-devel
a probably nicer way would be: - pure-data - pure-data-extended - pure-desiredata - pure-devel - pure-ext-ann - pure-ext-osc - pure-ext-zexy
i don't know whether it is possible to rename already release package-sections, but i guess not (like so many things on sourceforge). (but after a check i see, that it is possible to "hide" packages, so one could eventually fake a renaming by hiding the original one and creating a new one)
How about puredata.info for random things that won't be regularly updated? There is the download wiki exactly for things like this.
i do not agree here.
the download wiki is a place to get information. the sourceforge release system is a place to get stuff. as said before, i would prefer if large amounts of data would not be hosted at puredata.info (yet). the sourceforge release system provides a world-wide distributed, redundant, high-bandwidth download system, something we could _never_ provide on our own. so why not use it?
mfg.asdr IOhannes
On Apr 3, 2007, at 3:18 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
It would be good to keep the sourceforge page uncluttered, and adding all these sections would make it much more cluttered than it already is. But I do think it's a good idea to post the binaries one a website and remove them from CVS.
i don't think that this would clutter the sourceforge page. there is already a number of external packages in the download section, most of them seem to be unmaintained. (which kind of invalidates your argument about using "wiki for stuff that does not get updated on a regular basis")
the current sections are, in order of appearance: pd-devel (outdated? - last mid 2005) pd-extended (early 2006) pd-externals (OUTDATED - early 2003) pd-gem (early 2003) pd-osc (outdated - 2002) pure-data (uptodate - end 2006)
i believe, that this page would be more useful if there were lots of uptodate packages.
however, an example for an unstructured download page with lots(!) of packages (currently over 80!), is the plone-collective (projectname: "collective") found at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=55262 now this is _really_ a one-stop shop for loads of things. while the list is long, it is still managable to find what you need if you know what you are looking for. if you do not know what you are looking for, then everything with more than one package will get you lost.
i agree though, that the puredata download page could and should be structured (which it is currently not). since sourceforge orders packages alphabetically, one would just have to find a naming scheme, where: pd-vanilla is at the top, pd-extended is prominent too, pd-externals are grouped together (though distinguishable via package names!) somewhere below. pd-devel&desiredata could go next to pd-extended and pd-vanilla (if desired). i don't think that pd-devel/desiredata should go _before_ pd- vanilla and pd-extended.
so i would think of something like (annotations in ())
- pd
- pd-extended
- pd-external-ann
- pd-external-osc
- pd-external-zexy
- pure-desiredata
- pure-devel
a probably nicer way would be:
- pure-data
- pure-data-extended
- pure-desiredata
- pure-devel
- pure-ext-ann
- pure-ext-osc
- pure-ext-zexy
i don't know whether it is possible to rename already release package-sections, but i guess not (like so many things on sourceforge). (but after a check i see, that it is possible to "hide" packages, so one could eventually fake a renaming by hiding the original one and creating a new one)
How about puredata.info for random things that won't be regularly updated? There is the download wiki exactly for things like this.
i do not agree here.
the download wiki is a place to get information. the sourceforge release system is a place to get stuff. as said before, i would prefer if large amounts of data would not be hosted at puredata.info (yet). the sourceforge release system provides a world-wide distributed, redundant, high-bandwidth download system, something we could _never_ provide on our own. so why not use it?
The packages on sourceforge can only be maintained by a release manager. Therefore, the only packages that should go on that page should be packages that the release manager(s) will maintain. I will only maintain "pure-data" and "pd-extended" (and "pd-devel" if there were ever any releases). This really, really is not the place for random downloads. It is the place for final, maintained releases. Adding all those release adds a ton of work with very little gain.
As for "pd-externals", "pd-gem", and "pd-osc", I would prefer to delete those, but I didn't since it is serving as an archive. All these little random downloads will take hardly any bandwidth, they are rarely downloaded, so i don't think that's a real concern.
What we should be doing is working to decentralize the work so the library writing can do as much as possible by themselves. I think a eclipse style package manager for Pd would be the way. That way each person can easily host their own libraries, updates and all.
.hc
mfg.asdr IOhannes
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
Mistrust authority - promote decentralization. - the hacker ethic
-
Frank Barknecht -
Georg Holzmann -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
plessas＠mur.at