So all those interested in a new GUI should start working on it, there is lots
of interest.  Then we can incrementally change pd itself as there is a need.

.hc

On 01/21/2013 02:48 PM, Leandro da Mota Damasceno wrote:
> You're right. Damn, you're always right :)
>
> So, just to know where we are right now... What have been tested/done
> regarding the GUIs toolkits so far? I think we should at least have this
> set and go on from there...
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at>wrote:
>
>>
>> I think this is the general idea of what everyone wants to support.  But
>> the
>> way is actually takes shape is going to depend on whoever actually does the
>> work. A great example of this is the PDDP (Pure Data Documentation
>> Project).
>> We had lots of design meetings and then no one implemented the ideas.  Then
>> Jonathan picked up from that what was interesting to him and made the whole
>> meta help system, the search plugin, etc.
>>
>> The lesson there for me is that big design discussions only work if the
>> people
>> involved them are willing to do the work to implement them.  Instead, I
>> think
>> for a more decentralized community like this one, we only should nail down
>> the
>> key parts that everyone must use, then leave other decisions to those who
>> are
>> implementing those parts.
>>
>> So that means I'm happy to help people write there own GUI, and I'll
>> definitely be involved in the work of making it possible with Pd.
>>
>> .hc
>>
>> On 01/21/2013 01:05 PM, Leandro da Mota Damasceno wrote:
>>> That sounded like a Lego approach. :)
>>>
>>> So the way I see it the GUI development should be in the most seemless
>> way
>>> for the user, right?
>>>
>>> And we also have the problem between people who prefer a simple, leaner
>> GUI
>>> approach (the classic PD, for instance) against people who prefer a more
>>> sofisticated, and sexy GUI. And I believe both groups would also like
>> some
>>> more knobs and stuff...
>>>
>>> so basically, we should at least have two options of gui: simple
>> (classic)
>>> or sophisticated (sexy). But it would be cool to make it open enough to
>>> anyone develop their own or come up with new and customized ones. that
>>> would make PD way cooler than Max/MSP or anything else. So for that to
>> work
>>> (and now I must admit I really don't know the architecture behind this
>> part
>>> of PD, so maybe it is already this way), the comunication between the GUI
>>> and the rest of PD should be kept simple, fast and modulated, working
>> with
>>> the leanest possible API. I also think this is a good approach
>> considering
>>> that most of these toolkits will stop getting support way before PD
>> ceases
>>> to exist. I have also thought about the possibility of skins, but then
>>> loading a bunch of bitmaps would not help in terms of performance...
>>>
>>>
>>> At the same time we pick a toolkit and focus on that one first. So we
>>> should think of at least two teems, right? One at the GUI end and the
>> other
>>> at the core PD end...
>>>
>>> What do you guys think?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/21/2013 12:54 AM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Billy Stiltner <billy.stiltner@gmail.com>
>>>>>> To: IOhannes zmölnig <zmoelnig@iem.at>
>>>>>> Cc: pd-list@iem.at
>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 10:04 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PD] GUI toolkits and custom GUIs WAS: Integra Live 1.5
>>>> released
>>>>>>
>>>>>> haha , last month i tried to install juce to see about making an
>>>>>> alternate graphics front end to my patches. there  was some weirdness
>>>>>> in the way you compile it then run the introjucer or somethin to
>>>>>> update it then after the update something didn't quite work right.
>>>>>> then there are all the old projects that use the old steinberg vst sdk
>>>>>> which you cant get from steinberg anymore so all that is just awful. i
>>>>>> think that there should be a really nice updated version of juce
>>>>>> either available now or in the near future.  its a tossup between
>>>>>> fltk, qt , opengl ,juce, and processing.  i just want to be able to
>>>>>> add my waveform data filenames to the presets with a fileopen dialog
>>>>>> without using an external, string parsing like .scl files that have
>>>>>> 100.00 or 3/2, and polyphonic patchcords would be nice.
>>>>>
>>>>> What about the -guicmd "cmd..." flag?  Could one write a pd-gui.html
>>>>> that lives at localhost:1234, and have it talk to pd at its port on
>>>> localhost?
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you could just write the interface with html5 canvas, svg,
>>>>> javascript, or whatever.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Jonathan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That sounds feasible to me.
>>>>
>>>> .hc
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>>
>>>
>>
>