If you don’t want to use the bug tracker, it makes sense to write up a list of expr bugs you’ve found and move the discussion to pd-dev. I think everyone can agree that finding and fixing said bugs is a good thing we would all want to see happen.

Nutshell: yes, we can fix it and update it. This is open source which means everyone has the source code, so anyone can download it and modify it to their hearts content. Getting the work back “upstream” into the repository simply means it needs to be done in a way where others can test the updates to verify them. This often does not rely on the original author, especially if they have moved on to others things, but to the maintainers or current people with write access to the repo. 

Licensing wise, that has been cleared up more than a year ago and it was only an issue where a couple of old headers hadn’t been removed from the files. “Licensing” in this case was only to clarify which license the sources actually had since there were two different ones listed in different places. Both were open source licenses which do not place restrictions on who and what can be updated.

--------
Dan Wilcox
@danomatika
danomatika.com
robotcowboy.com

On Jun 7, 2015, at 5:49 PM, pd-list-request@lists.iem.at wrote:

From: Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PD] expr "copysign" function doesn't seem to work
Date: June 7, 2015 at 5:17:00 PM EDT
To: Jan Baumgart <raga.raga@gmx.de>


Well, I'm worried about the bugs in expr and that they get fixed actually, there are more bugs I found by the way. Now Shahrokh doesn't seem to be working on it and making updates anymore. I remember I complained about something in 2009 to him and it never got fixed. I could list them all as well, but I won't make a bug report if it can't be fixed...

So, what could we do? Could we just fix it and update it? Or does he have to do it? 

I remember some issues regarding its license as well, but never really understood them, maybe the license issue prevents people from updating it?