On Oct 19, 2007, at 2:53 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Oct 19, 2007, at 7:51 AM, Nicolas Montgermont wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :
I read it as something that used to work but not longer does
with newer version. That would either be deprecated or abandoned.That was my thinking, sorry for the approximate usage of
"deprecated".just to make that clear: i did not try to be pedantic. but my command of the english language is surely worse than hans's,
and i always want to take the opportunity to learn something. your definition of "deprecated" was contradictory for me (though it
might not have been for others)
ok, no problem.
I think something like this in the status box would be useful: Status: deprecated (0.37.2) or Status: abandoned (0.33)
i would be a bit more specific and use "pd-0.33" instead of just
"0.33". it might as well be "pd-extended-0.34" (if the pd-extended version
differs with pd-vanilla regarding the interoperability of the said
thing) or "linux-2.2.18". there are manifold reasons why an external could be abandoned/ deprecated or simply dysfuntional.
I prefer if the -extended was in the version, since it's a distro
rather than a branch, fork, or separate program, i.e. 0.39.3-
extended. But I don't think it's too likely that something will be
deprecated in Pd but not in Pd-extended, but perhaps.
and (if i haven't said that before), i would suggest using a more
positive wording like "works with: (pd<0.35)"
I am not opposed to coming up with our own terminology. But when
there is existing terminology that works for us, I think it's good to
use it. I think "deprecated" could cover this.
.hc
If there is more info, then a section could easily be added in the
text.definitely.
fgmasdr. IOhannes
You can't steal a gift. Bird gave the world his music, and if you can
hear it, you can have it. - Dizzy Gillespie