2017-02-17 18:51 GMT-02:00 IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig@iem.at>:
check the archives for the discussion on (not) automatically
creating those paths (...) i would like to avoid going through that discussion *again*.

I could use some help like pointing me a thread subject or something, I usually never find discussions I want and been part of in the archives...
 
please file a feature request at the deken project

done https://github.com/pure-data/deken/issues/140


Oh, I am definitely going to challenge that notion. I am totally
convinced the _correct_ way for the user-specific folder is to be
created automatically at some point.

not shockingly, I totally agree... The current situation is just totally absurd indeed and I just wanted to stress it.  

From what I remember, people objected to the auto-creation of ~/pd-
externals directory. Yes, I, too, find it rogue to create visible
folders directly in the user home without asking.

Was that really it? and why is it "rogue" to create a folder Pd needs as the standard? I can't make sense out of this...
 
I vaguely remember that people didn't want a pre-established way,
because they thought that workflows are so diverse that deken shouldn't
enforce one specific workflow.

But that it's exactly what it is doing right now! It always asks for the SAME folder every time you start Pd... which is _never_ the one I use. So if that was the reasoning, then this seems to have been in vain... and how about this issue I had with windows? Where it's forcing a workflow that doesn't work out of the box unless there is some workaround...
 
Deviating workflows wouldn't be harmed at all by auto-creation of
the user specific standard directory.

It would actually have solve my issue in windows...
 
cheers

2017-02-17 19:27 GMT-02:00 Roman Haefeli <reduzent@gmail.com>:
On Fre, 2017-02-17 at 21:51 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> 
>
> it's trivial to create those folders (deken did that in the past),
> but
> it has been consciously disabled.

I disagree. I don't find it a conscious decision.

> i would like to avoid going through that discussion *again*.

Sorry, since the topic came up, I had to express what I was thinking
for quite some time. While I understand your rejection to discuss the
same topic several times, good progress often needs several attempts. 

Roman
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list