On Sep 13, 2007, at 2:17 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
i tried to always call it 'pd-vanilla/externals', not just 'pd- vanilla', in order to make clear, that i am using pd-vanilla and compiling the externals myself. anyway, if i compile the externals how it is
described in the README, that comes with the externals, and which i call the 'original way' to compile them, i get one library containing several objects, where namespaces don't work.Currently for Pd-extended it's kind of opaque or mysterious how externals or libraries got their namesspace names. As all the objects need to be in their own directory to not overwrite each others nameclashes, it was natural to takes directory names from CVS and then somehow the directory names got promoted to namespaces, even when the original authors never intended to use their CVS-directory names as namespace. Iemlib is one example, list-abs is another.
Who makes the decision about what words to use as namespace prefixes? The author of the library? Pd-list? Everone on her/his own? Hans?
What happened is that when there were libs that I thought should be
included in Pd-extended, but I had to do the work myself to include
them, I hacked it together. It seems quite apparent now, I made some
bad decisions. Feel free to correct them :-D. (And if you haven't
noticed yet, I'm all about big, toothy grins :-D ).
I think going forward, the author should name her library and that
name should be used for the namespace prefix. There are some rules
that should apply, like no special characters in library names, all
lowercase, etc. I also hope that when people are deciding what to
call their library, they will consult the list. But it is inevitable
that some people won't, so our system should be flexible enough to
support that, not without limits tho.
.hc
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are
deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from
scarcity." -John Gilmore