On Jun 18, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I think that gridflow would probably be more easily maintained
outside of Pd-extended, for now at least.GridFlow is not in a situation much different from Gem or PDP. It's
just that there's more of an incentive to get Gem running in pd- extended, than there is to get GridFlow running. I'm talking about
today's GridFlow, which is quite Rubyless. I think that basically
you say that because you simply don't feel like handling it.Now I have a contract item that is to include GridFlow in pd- extended, or if that fails, at least to make a version of pd- extended that has GridFlow in it. It is likely that it gets done in
June, perhaps even in the next few days.
These days, I think we should try to make it easy to install and
manage external libraries. Then once things are very stable, they
should be included in Pd-extended. That's what I've learned from my
experience so far.
And honestly, I don't want to deal with more build issues, I am very
tired of it. So if you want to include it, please don't expect me to
do it, especially since you are getting paid and I am not.
.hc
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.