That's bad organization on the part of the "experience users' IMO. Experience does not often translate to "easy for everyone else". ;)

The best situation is to organize abstractions into a subfolder and use [declare -path ./subfolder] to add it. That way you can have 1 main, obvious patch and everything else is more hidden.

A further step is provide a shell/batch script which then starts Pd with the main patch as a command line argument. With the new preferences system, you can also specify a config file to load as well. A good name for this script is something like "RUNME" :)

On Jul 28, 2017, at 3:03 PM, Fede Camara Halac camarafede@gmail.com wrote:

i also have seen this manner of working in other experienced users who send a folder with tons of .pd files (and it often takes a while to figure out which one to open). But, i agree this works and it's very convenient. I also think this needs some pd knowledge on the person receiving the folder, depending on the case. Especially if Its a patch from the extended era

As for making an "exporter", I believe Pd extended had something like this and it builds down to copying all basically Pd itself into a directory with the patches required. This could be accomplished with a GUI plugin using tcl or even just a bash script, modifying to core Pd GUI is not really required (hence the plugin mechanism). It's a shame not so many people are taking advantage of this without having to wait for someone to *possibly* add stuff to Pd itself.

Dan Wilcox @danomatika http://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com/ robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com/

Just to be clear, my point is not to blame anyone or anything. Navigating through a pd patch fun, didactic, and is often hard unless there is a clear structure. That structure becomes clearer when it evidences itself firstly in the patch directory IMO.

I think, however, one of the nicest things of pd is that the way you structure is linked to how you organize stuff in your mind and not in a pre-established way.

And this intensifies with use, making your structures very personal to the way you think. (Mixing a bit of what other users teach you by going through their libs, patches, making this pd-mind a more interesting topic)

What i'm thinking here is a given structure, that is only there as a last step, not during the patching. And is only meant for the user to send to a non-pd user.

Dan mentioned there was a build feature in extended, and now i think that there is no real need for this since that build feature has been left out apparently. But, i'd still mess around with a script or two to automate this if i can manage.

Sorry to go so off-topic on this, thanks for your thoughts so far!!

fdch.github.io/tv

On Jul 28, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres porres@gmail.com wrote:

2017-07-28 10:03 GMT-03:00 Fede Camara Halac camarafede@gmail.com:

...

Thanks, Dan. I understand this, and i also have seen this manner of working in other experienced users who send a folder with tons of .pd files (and it often takes a while to figure out which one to open).

Guess whoever sends a messy thing is the one to blame. There's no feature that will prevent people from being clumsy and writing dirty patches and stuff.

I agree with Dan that Pd currently offers ways to be clean and organized when it comes to this matter.

cheers