2016-02-17 16:33 GMT-02:00 Fred Jan Kraan fjkraan@xs4all.nl:

Hi Alexandre,

...

You may have noticed a pull request already for [pong]. I'm working with someone else and we should be having scale / scale~ / atodb / dbtoa / atodb~ / dbtoa~ / trunc~ ready quite soon!

Yes, I noticed. I appreciate all you do for pd and cyclone in particular, but I cannot accept the request. Cyclone is one of the few libraries with a closed set of objects; only those part of Max/MSP, arbitrary set around version 4.6 or 5.

Cyclone is already quite big, with 150+ objects. This seems a good reason to be selective in which objects should be added. Just because objects are or should be in Max/MSP is not reason enough.

Well, I appreciate the work you're doing too, and I hope you appreciate the interest on this library from users and willing collaborators.

I fail to see the reason why you wouldn't accept the collaboration of other to include new objects cloned from Max, when they were properly coded, tested, and presented with help files. What is your particular problem with this object? What are your criteria for the decision of not including objects?

If it exists in another library, it is unneeded IMHO.

This seems to be the only criteria you raised. Well, pong, for example, does something that I don't know if other objects do... for all I know, it's not available in other libraries! So there you go.

Moreover, how would one know if a particular object from Max is presented in another library if it's missing from cyclone? If someone is looking for a set of objects from Max to work in Pd, he cannot know what other objects with different names and in which different libraries it exist... lets say there's some other object out there that replaces pong, how can I know?

But mostly, one should not be forced to download several libraries if they are looking for a set of max objects when installing only one particular library would do it. And who can tell if those libraries are being maintained? If we were still in the Pd Extended era, maybe you could reason that, but that is over, and that is one more reason why cyclone should be added with as much clones as possible.

By the way, lyonpoutporri has cartopol~ and poltocar~, what should we do now, get rid of the cyclone versions?

In my opinion, I don't think there is any reason why one object should not be included. Specially if many people are interested in them and even collaborating. I've been getting a good response of other wanting to collaborate and that would be happy to see this project grow, now I don't know about many people who would not like new objects to be added.

But anyway, as it turns out, I made a careful research to elect many objects that I think are relevant to be brought to the Pd world, and one criteria is that they are not present in other libraries (that I know of), or that they bring interesting and useful functionalities that are not present in the objects we have. And well, I presented this objects to the list and you gave me instructions on how to work on them and make the pull requests, I don't understand why - at this point in the game - you're raising issues with collaborating and including new objects. Perhaps you could have a look at the objects I proposed and discuss which ones you think should be added and why.

Cheers, Alex