Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
You can see which Pd libraries people are working on adding to Debian here, they all start with pd-*: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged
that's what i mean, i don't see unauthorized, pdp or pidip, neither in abandonned libs, neither in 'to be packaged'...
quid?
pd-pdp is in already, right?
no if you mess up with : pd-pddp: a support library for the Pure Data Documentation Project http://bugs.debian.org/591732, 61 days in preparation.
i don't see the point, so i just notice you don't really support external libraries anymore...
well pd-extended will just be pd-reduced ( to the bare minimum ), do you think i care? you'd be wrong there, i like pure hackers that can compile what they need
ciao, sevy
Someone needs to adopt the others. I'd rather someone else handled unauthorized, but I would adopt unauthorized if I can convert it to the library template style.
I can't do it all!
.hc
"Free software means you control what your computer does. Non-free software means someone else controls that, and to some extent controls you." - Richard M. Stallman
ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
You can see which Pd libraries people are working on adding to Debian here, they all start with pd-*: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged
that's what i mean, i don't see unauthorized, pdp or pidip, neither in abandonned libs, neither in 'to be packaged'...
quid?
pd-pdp is in already, right?
no if you mess up with : pd-pddp: a support library for the Pure Data Documentation Project http://bugs.debian.org/591732, 61 days in preparation.
i don't see the point, so i just notice you don't really support external libraries anymore...
well pd-extended will just be pd-reduced ( to the bare minimum ), do you think i care? you'd be wrong there, i like pure hackers that can compile what they need
this sentence was not exactly correct, i will from now on encourage people to use pd packages from pure:dyne, because they are more complete, tested and i also feel i can report problems to them
and they are even _friendly_ enough to take care of my problems ( apart that they are friends also )
just point your browser there : puredyne.org
the grass is greener
saludos, sevy
On 06/10/10 21:07, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
You can see which Pd libraries people are working on adding to Debian here, they all start with pd-*: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged
that's what i mean, i don't see unauthorized, pdp or pidip, neither in abandonned libs, neither in 'to be packaged'...
I think the whole project of getting extended and the packages set up and building in Debian is just now getting to the point where lots of libraries could be done. Getting the pattern right obviously meant starting with a couple first, then adding a batch which were easier to do. Now it is possible to use these as templates. Doing it carefully in stages seems like a good idea to me, it has taken a couple of months to get to this point.
Simon
Simon Wise wrote:
On 06/10/10 21:07, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
You can see which Pd libraries people are working on adding to Debian here, they all start with pd-*: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged
that's what i mean, i don't see unauthorized, pdp or pidip, neither in abandonned libs, neither in 'to be packaged'...
I think the whole project of getting extended and the packages set up and building in Debian is just now getting to the point where lots of libraries could be done. Getting the pattern right obviously meant starting with a couple first, then adding a batch which were easier to do. Now it is possible to use these as templates. Doing it carefully in stages seems like a good idea to me, it has taken a couple of months to get to this point.
Simon
you're wise, simon
but obviously the intention is to abandon some libraries ( once again and again, unilateral decision without discussion )
i'm tired of wasting time
ciao, sevy
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:07 +0200, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
but obviously the intention is to abandon some libraries
That is certainly not true. You're looking from the wrong perspective. It's not the case that someone decides _not_ to include certain libraries, it's more that some people are interested in doing the work to get certain libraries included. In the case of pdp there is not even a need for that effort, since it is already included, as IOhannes pointed out. Also here on my ubuntu 10.04 system:
~$ aptitude show pd-pdp Package: pd-pdp Version: 1:0.12.5-1ubuntu1
Feel free to become a member of the pkg-multimedia team in order to push the packages you want into Debian. I don't think that anyone would object to having also pidip and unauthorized in the repositories.
( once again and again, unilateral decision without discussion )
Thanks for starting that discussion now.
Roman
ola,
that's exactly the worst possible answer...
do it yourself and the author of pd-extended will get the credits..
no thank you, pure:dyne seems very honest to me
furthermore i have many other things to do ... so, just not wasting more time with pd-extended
ciao, sevy
Roman Haefeli wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:07 +0200, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
but obviously the intention is to abandon some libraries
That is certainly not true. You're looking from the wrong perspective. It's not the case that someone decides _not_ to include certain libraries, it's more that some people are interested in doing the work to get certain libraries included. In the case of pdp there is not even a need for that effort, since it is already included, as IOhannes pointed out. Also here on my ubuntu 10.04 system:
~$ aptitude show pd-pdp Package: pd-pdp Version: 1:0.12.5-1ubuntu1
Feel free to become a member of the pkg-multimedia team in order to push the packages you want into Debian. I don't think that anyone would object to having also pidip and unauthorized in the repositories.
( once again and again, unilateral decision without discussion )
Thanks for starting that discussion now.
Roman
Roman Haefeli wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 22:07 +0200, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
but obviously the intention is to abandon some libraries
That is certainly not true. You're looking from the wrong perspective. It's not the case that someone decides _not_ to include certain libraries, it's more that some people are interested in doing the work to get certain libraries included. In the case of pdp there is not even a need for that effort, since it is already included, as IOhannes pointed out.
this is absolutely wrong, this package is old and doesn't respect pd-extended rules at all ...
so stop believing superficial information, thank you ( the name pd-pdp doesn't mean nothing at all )
ciao, sevy
On Oct 6, 2010, at 10:07 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
Simon Wise wrote:
On 06/10/10 21:07, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Oct 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola, > > You can see which Pd libraries people are working on adding to > Debian here, they all start with pd-*: > http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged > that's what i mean, i don't see unauthorized, pdp or pidip, neither in abandonned libs, neither in 'to be packaged'...
I think the whole project of getting extended and the packages set
up and building in Debian is just now getting to the point where
lots of libraries could be done. Getting the pattern right
obviously meant starting with a couple first, then adding a batch
which were easier to do. Now it is possible to use these as
templates. Doing it carefully in stages seems like a good idea to
me, it has taken a couple of months to get to this point.Simon
you're wise, simon
but obviously the intention is to abandon some libraries ( once again and again, unilateral decision without discussion )
i'm tired of wasting time
ciao, sevy
There is no one saying we have to abandon any of the libraries that
are included in Pd-extended. I am saying that I cannot keep up with
all of the maintenance of all of the libraries that I currently
maintain in Pd-extended. I need help with that. I have taken on many
libraries which have no other maintainer. For things like PDP, PiDiP,
etc. I hope that people who actually use them will maintain them, and
I can help where I can. I barely do anything with video, so I hardly
know how to test PDP, etc.
Even better, the people working on pure:dyne packages and people
working on Pd-extended packages can merge efforts, get them into
Debian, then there will be no difference between PDP/PiDiP/etc whether
its included in pure:dyne or Pd-extended on Debian, Ubuntu, etc. We
are already well along that road.
.hc
'You people have such restrictive dress for women,’ she said, hobbling
away in three inch heels and panty hose to finish out another pink-
collar temp pool day. - “Hijab Scene #2", by Mohja Kahf
My modest contribution for the owners of a Neo Freerunner.
Multi purpose puredata interface for neo freerunner on debian based distributions. Tested on qtmokoV26.
apt-get install puredata
The following interface presents 4 bouttons and a 10 step slider. Combinations between the four "bangs" and the "slider" can process multiple events, like sound modulation, TCP/IP data communication, domotic systems, music player, and wathever you want.
Colors are there to facilitate the understanding of the interface. Also consider the fact that if you want your patch to fit exactly on the FR screen you have to set the first numbers on the first line of the code below with "0" and "0".
Cosmin
ola,
There is no one saying we have to abandon any of the libraries that are included in Pd-extended.
you published a list of abandonned libraries...
I am saying that I cannot keep up with all of the maintenance of all of the libraries that I currently maintain in Pd-extended.
that's a different issue, i'm glad you'd rather explain it that way.
I need help with that. I have taken on many libraries which have no other maintainer. For things like PDP, PiDiP, etc. I hope that people who actually use them will maintain them, and I can help where I can.
I barely do anything with video, so I hardly know how to test PDP, etc.
i know that but pd-extended was supposed to do video too no?
Even better, the people working on pure:dyne packages and people working on Pd-extended packages can merge efforts, get them into Debian, then there will be no difference between PDP/PiDiP/etc whether its included in pure:dyne or Pd-extended on Debian, Ubuntu, etc. We are already well along that road.
i understood there was no real agreement here, because your packaging rules diverge no? let's see what pure:dyne people can say about this,
sevy
.hc
'You people have such restrictive dress for women,’ she said, hobbling away in three inch heels and panty hose to finish out another pink-collar temp pool day. - “Hijab Scene #2", by Mohja Kahf
ola again,
anyway people could be surprised that we speak of Debian packaging when the original subject of this thread was pd for Mac OSX..
so what will be the future policy of pd-extended for Mac OSX now?
saludos, sevy
ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
There is no one saying we have to abandon any of the libraries that are included in Pd-extended.
you published a list of abandonned libraries...
I am saying that I cannot keep up with all of the maintenance of all of the libraries that I currently maintain in Pd-extended.
that's a different issue, i'm glad you'd rather explain it that way.
I need help with that. I have taken on many libraries which have no other maintainer. For things like PDP, PiDiP, etc. I hope that people who actually use them will maintain them, and I can help where I can. I barely do anything with video, so I hardly know how to test PDP, etc.
i know that but pd-extended was supposed to do video too no?
Even better, the people working on pure:dyne packages and people working on Pd-extended packages can merge efforts, get them into Debian, then there will be no difference between PDP/PiDiP/etc whether its included in pure:dyne or Pd-extended on Debian, Ubuntu, etc. We are already well along that road.
i understood there was no real agreement here, because your packaging rules diverge no? let's see what pure:dyne people can say about this,
sevy
.hc
'You people have such restrictive dress for women,’ she said, hobbling away in three inch heels and panty hose to finish out another pink-collar temp pool day. - “Hijab Scene #2", by Mohja Kahf
From my point of view, if libraries are going to be bundled with Pd-
extended, then that library needs to be included in Debian. My
development effort is to making it easy for people to make,
distribute, and install their own libraries, so they don't need to be
included in Pd-extended to be easy to get and use.
The video libraries tend to be the hardest for people to build
themselves, so it makes sense to have them included in a pre-packaged
way. But Matju has done a good job of making Gridflow easy to install
as a standalone.
.hc
On Oct 9, 2010, at 5:11 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola again,
anyway people could be surprised that we speak of Debian packaging when the original subject of this thread was pd for Mac OSX..
so what will be the future policy of pd-extended for Mac OSX now?
saludos, sevy
ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
There is no one saying we have to abandon any of the libraries
that are included in Pd-extended.you published a list of abandonned libraries...
I am saying that I cannot keep up with all of the maintenance of
all of the libraries that I currently maintain in Pd-extended.that's a different issue, i'm glad you'd rather explain it that way.
I need help with that. I have taken on many libraries which have
no other maintainer. For things like PDP, PiDiP, etc. I hope that
people who actually use them will maintain them, and I can help
where I can. I barely do anything with video, so I hardly know
how to test PDP, etc.i know that but pd-extended was supposed to do video too no?
Even better, the people working on pure:dyne packages and people
working on Pd-extended packages can merge efforts, get them into
Debian, then there will be no difference between PDP/PiDiP/etc
whether its included in pure:dyne or Pd-extended on Debian,
Ubuntu, etc. We are already well along that road.i understood there was no real agreement here, because your packaging rules diverge no? let's see what pure:dyne people can say about this,
sevy
.hc
'You people have such restrictive dress for women,’ she said,
hobbling away in three inch heels and panty hose to finish out
another pink-collar temp pool day. - “Hijab Scene #2", by Mohja
Kahf
Using ReBirth is like trying to play an 808 with a long stick. - David Zicarelli
ola,
this doesn't really answer to the 2 main questions :
- will pure:dyne and pd-extended debian packages
will be compatible ? ( i doubt it ), if so why make the work twice?
- how will you install pd-extended on Mac OSX ?
i don't get the future of pd-extended, i'm already lost enough in all pd branches and yes i think this community diverges.
ciao, sevy
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
From my point of view, if libraries are going to be bundled with Pd-extended, then that library needs to be included in Debian. My development effort is to making it easy for people to make, distribute, and install their own libraries, so they don't need to be included in Pd-extended to be easy to get and use.
The video libraries tend to be the hardest for people to build themselves, so it makes sense to have them included in a pre-packaged way. But Matju has done a good job of making Gridflow easy to install as a standalone.
.hc
On Oct 9, 2010, at 11:08 PM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
ola,
this doesn't really answer to the 2 main questions :
- will pure:dyne and pd-extended debian packages
will be compatible ? ( i doubt it ), if so why make the work twice?
I hope they will be compatible, but that's up to the pure:dyne people
too. There are four Pd people working in the Debian pkg-multimedia
team: IOhannes, Alexandre Quessy, Roman, and me. That seems to be the
best place for collaborating on Debian packages, and that's where we
are submitting our packages. So I hope that pure:dyne people will
also join there.
- how will you install pd-extended on Mac OSX ?
That will remain the same, no changes. Same with Windows.
.hc
i don't get the future of pd-extended, i'm already lost enough in all pd branches and yes i think this community diverges.
ciao, sevy
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
From my point of view, if libraries are going to be bundled with Pd- extended, then that library needs to be included in Debian. My
development effort is to making it easy for people to make,
distribute, and install their own libraries, so they don't need to
be included in Pd-extended to be easy to get and use.The video libraries tend to be the hardest for people to build
themselves, so it makes sense to have them included in a pre- packaged way. But Matju has done a good job of making Gridflow
easy to install as a standalone..hc
"It is convenient to imagine a power beyond us because that means we
don't have to examine our own lives.", from "The Idols of
Environmentalism", by Curtis White
ola,
i will from now on encourage people to use pd packages from pure:dyne, because they are more complete, tested ..
yeh i forgot to give the right link here : https://launchpad.net/~puredyne-team/+archive/ppa?field.series_filter=karmic
( thanks aymeric ) all will be ported to lucid soon, but karmic packages can be installed on lucid, says aymeric
i just say i will recommend this from now on, and not pd-extended ( which will become limited de facto ), and not desire data ( which is still this vaporware people keep speaking about ) and not jMax which too slow fro real time...
i don't know why people give their opinion about this decision, it's like, if i want to dye my hair blue, do i need your opinion?
ciao, sevy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 10/06/2010 04:53 AM, ydegoyon@gmail.com wrote:
pd-pdp is in already, right?
no if you mess up with : pd-pddp: a support library for the Pure Data Documentation Project http://bugs.debian.org/591732, 61 days in preparation.
how about: http://packages.debian.org/sid/pd-pdp (or if you prefer: http://packages.debian.org/lenny/pd-pdp)
mfga IOhannes
-
cosmin O_O -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmölnig -
Roman Haefeli -
Simon Wise -
ydegoyon＠gmail.com