Le 23/01/13 20:16, András Murányi a
écrit :
I think the first paragraph is lovely and we shall
keep it as it is, to avoid extra iterations.
I don't wholeheartedly agree with the rewrite of the 2nd
paragraph:
I think as well it must be corrected.
the points about pd being free and being available in
source are missing now,
I agree for free. For the sources, as the first line of the text
says it's an open source software, I am not sure it's necessary.
as well as a the point that pd-extended is more than
vanilla+externals but it's also patched.
I don't think it's specially relevant when you want to explain
Pd-extended in one line.
Also, afaik, vanilla is not "written by" Miller but
rather "maintained" by him as it contains code from various
authors.
please edit, I think it's just a question of adding "mainly"
somewhere.
So, at the end, I personally prefer how this
paragraphed looked before the last commit.
All this work being quite subjective (as it is free text not
program code) *please* give some reasons/rationale when you make
change changes: why did you do what you did, what is the
improvement? Otherwise we might just keep changing until the end
of times :o)
You are right:
What I wanted to do here is trying to equilibrate the informations.
I think it's much more relevant for a newcomer to know what is PD vs
Pd extended, than to know Pd is available for IRIX. For me the text
is more looking like a technical explanation around Pd, than an
introduction to the Pd universe. For example, GEM was not mentionned
once in the whole text, but cyclone was. In the end, it is more an
introduction for developpers, than for users. What I think we must
correct. It's a matter of balancing the informations, and to start
from the beginning.
I don't think we need the extra paragraph about graphical
programming, but a picture of an actual patch would tell a lot
(without words).
I disagree. The whole point of Pd is patching, but the word is only
used once in the text in the sentence:
It is easy to extend Pd by nesting reusable patches
("abstractions") or by utilising object classes ("externals").
No words are written on what is a patch. And I think it's totally
fundamental.
I don't support mixing the 3rd and the 4th paragraph
either - they are two different points (extendability, history).
If you want. IMHO, Pd extendability can be introduced in a sentence
where Pd basic usage needs a paragraph. Max explanations worth a
look for comparisons with pd's:
http://cycling74.com/whatismax/
I think as well the sentence from the 4th paragraph:
The core of Pd (aka Pd Vanilla) is written and
maintained by Miller Puckette and includes the work of many
developers, making the whole package very much a community
effort.
is redundant now.
It should be nice to have other opinions on all that?
We are close to publishing :)
Best,
n