hi Thomas, all,
El vie, 27-05-2005 a las 08:57 +0200, Thomas Grill escribió:
[...]
there seems to be a misunderstanding: as stated, i didn't take the pdogg code at all. Hence it can't be named a branch or fork. I simply made a new object from scratch, ignoring the pdogg code.
you're right, I introduced the confusion. it's clear this was not a fork. apologies then.
I also understand and respect the other points you've stated.
[...]
sounds more like a crash against Olaf's work which would block the publishing of this new creature.
sorry, can't follow.
Your idealism is very valuable, but it makes me angry that you argue with false arguments against people that already have tons of code released open-source and actively maintain it.
I don't argue against anyone.
But I argue, that's true. Just because after using pdogg for quite long time, and fixing some bugs, and after publishing back (unofficially yet) it came up this part of the thread between Olaf and you (Thomas) where it turned to be that there is another ogg external, but we didn't even know if was 'out' there. So it just feels a bit obscure to someone somehow trying to take over the development of it.
Now I will have a look at your external to check if it makes sense to continue pdogg or what to do.
I'm already tired of this open vs. closed source discussion, which is really useless in this context.
it's ok, sorry if I bugged you, we can leave the open vs. closed source discussion behind.
the important thing now, from my pov, would be to achieve a reasonable improved version of ogg implementation within pd.
as I've fixed some useful (for me and sure some others) stuff in pdogg, but still some other part seems not clear for me, as my PD with kernel 2.6 still freezes while using oggread~ or oggamp~ for example :/
so my changes are not enough. I will go through your extern in a while.
thanks for the wide patience best present, Ramiro.
best future, Thomas
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list