Hi,
finally I looked a bit at it. I can't say much, but a couple of things:
give a general opinion. Unless I do replace the pd-ext patches with these
ones, and then in a couple of weeks might have something general to say.
or should we make a possy and go to the big man with this request?
Pd(-ext). but as a (small) developer, I'm not sure if your strategy is the
best. I saw that you went into everyone's help patches and added the meta
developers should then be the ones doing that work. Or, assuming that your
patches make it into main Pd, the next time I update some help patch I'll
erase your work, because "your" version isn't "my" version.
So, it might be easier to either make a small document telling the
developers to add x and y to their patches to conform to the new pddp
logic - and put this somewhere in the wiki for new developers to read -,
or you send them your version of the patches, which they should take and
build on.
Unless you want to constantly check if everyone is using the right
objects/tags/etc.
I'll give some comments to H-C's comments:
- think that all help patches should have the same width, but the height
should be adjusted to minimize white space, like with abs-help.pd
I agree. I also like fontsize 10 better than 12. but doesn't anyone
complain?
- I think we should make the help patches per object, not the mega-helps
like Miller makes (acoustics, etc.) If you want to make help patches for
things like mtof~, I'll make the changes in Pd-extended so that it has
its own help patch
with some objects might make sense, like the arythmetic ones, or the
acoustic conversions.
But I think that mega-patches should be helpful for new people, provided
that the individual information is also somewhere to be found.
Also, more all_about-patches can always be interesting. they act like
programming tutorials, and can be very helpful.
Is there any specific work to be done? As said, I don't know the
collection well enough to say something about it.
João