Em qua., 2 de jun. de 2021 às 17:13, IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig@iem.at> escreveu:

i hear you, but i don't know what you are asking.

I'll try again

- yes there are "v0.0extended" versions.

yeah, that's what I meant, sorry, so my question was if we could rename the "v0.0extended" version of cyclone as "v0.1alpha56.extended".

Cause I would then include "v0.1alpha55.extended" as well.

i'm also not sure about the actual merits of uploading newly compiled
binaries of 15 year old libraries that are still actively maintained.
the original upload happened because we needed a starting base to make
deken attractive.
it also helped people port their patches from Pd-extended.
but there never was a RPi version of Pd-extended.

Yeah, my concern is 'resurrecting old patches from extended', and my reasoning is that 'v0.1alpha55' was the version that was carried for the most part and v0.1alpha56 only came at the very last version and got deleted. There's a problem in this v0.1alpha56 version, it broke all spectral processing when trying to fix a bug in [cartopol~]/[poltocar~]. This ruined all of my spectral processing examples and is the reason why my old tutorial that ran on extended used forever the 0.42-5 version.

i'm all for keeping old versions around (as in: don't ever delete
artefacts from deken)
but that doesn't necessarily mean that we should re-surrect bitrotten
"things".

Well... I believe 'v0.1alpha55' better represents the 'extended' period/version and I would like to include that too and would also like to prevent confusion.

So, what do you think?