[puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Tyler Leavitt Tyler Leavitt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

Hello list,

So I'm writing this on a first boot of Puredyne 10.10 DVD-i386 alpha-4 live. Everything looks great... unetbootin installed it flawlessly and it booted nice and quick. Now to install...

My question, however, is regarding the relation between the Puredata that comes with pure:dyne and Pd-extended. What are the differences between the two as far as externals that are packaged? Is there a reason you don't just supply pd-extended? Or is it the pure:dyne version just pd-extended with the older branding?

Thanks,
Tyler

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Julian Brooks Julian Brooks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

Hi Tyler,

Excuse me for hijacking your thread somewhat:

Have you managed to install?  I couldn't get the shortcut to respond, though it runs nice off usb for me too.

I'm not involved in packaging pure data at all but my gut feelings are that:
1. Running vanilla allows for a quicker update cycle.
2. Less bloat.
3. My preference is that vanilla is more aesthetically pleasing somehow.
4.  Historic reasons: pde was far less stable a few years ago, plus had problems with some libraries and objects not loading - nameclashes etc.  Indeed it's still the case with some libs in pde now (vbap springs to mind).

Pd comes with what the devs believe are the most useful libs with many extra just waiting to be added to the .pdrc.

Of course any extra libs you need can be compiled quite easily for pd but some of them can be tricky - I attempted to install 'cyclone' a few months ago and just gave up when it became a PITA.

One final thought, and it's something I have never heard anyone discuss at all but I have wondered about:  Is there some Euro-centric thing that vanilla is somehow 'cooler' (for want of a better word) than pde?:)

I recently ran a project on pde and have since installed pddp into my machine.  So much better set of help files I think.

All good wishes,

Julian



On 23 June 2011 23:33, Tyler Leavitt <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello list,

So I'm writing this on a first boot of Puredyne 10.10 DVD-i386 alpha-4 live. Everything looks great... unetbootin installed it flawlessly and it booted nice and quick. Now to install...

My question, however, is regarding the relation between the Puredata that comes with pure:dyne and Pd-extended. What are the differences between the two as far as externals that are packaged? Is there a reason you don't just supply pd-extended? Or is it the pure:dyne version just pd-extended with the older branding?

Thanks,
Tyler

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne


---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Jonathan Wilkes Jonathan Wilkes
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

Pd extended includes:
* a patched source so that it can include [initbang]-- which, among other things,
allows you to create abstractions that have variable inlets/outlets (like [route] does)--
and [closebang]-- which sends a bang immediately before deleting its parent canvas.
* opaque object boxes (they are light grey, I think) and lighter grey borders.
* visual difference between signal inlets/outlets and control inlets/outlets (very helpful IMO).
* different default fonts (I think)

There's also Pd-l2ork, which includes Pd extended source patches plus:
* iemguis ([bng], [vslider], etc.) which can be resized with the mouse (and labels can be
moved with mouse, too)
* way more effecient redrawing of gui objects and "Put" menu arrays
* patch that maps "$@" to expand to all arguments (from the parent patch if abstraction,
incoming message if msg box)
* more consistent Gnome-like look and feel in linux
* right-click and choose "move to back/front" to change an object's z order
* improved cyclone objects
* magic glass (hover over a connection and see the message currently being passed
over it)
* max-style trigger that takes numeric args (like [pack] )
* notification when element of a "Put" menu array is changed
* no crash when a patch sends a message to close itself, better scrolling, lots of other
fixes

Both include PDDP docs by default, which I've been working on for some time now.

Btw- I made a search gui-plugin in 0.43 that takes advantage of all the tags I added to
core docs and (many) external help files.  So now you can search for objects by keyword,
author, description, and even inlet/outlet specs (e.g., find an object that takes a symbol at its
left inlet and outputs a list).

-Jonathan

--- On Fri, 6/24/11, J bz <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: J bz <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended
To: "puredyne" <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, June 24, 2011, 11:25 AM

Hi Tyler,

Excuse me for hijacking your thread somewhat:

Have you managed to install?  I couldn't get the shortcut to respond, though it runs nice off usb for me too.

I'm not involved in packaging pure data at all but my gut feelings are that:
1. Running vanilla allows for a quicker update cycle.
2. Less bloat.
3. My preference is that vanilla is more aesthetically pleasing somehow.
4.  Historic reasons: pde was far less stable a few years ago, plus had problems with some libraries and objects not loading - nameclashes etc.  Indeed it's still the case with some libs in pde now (vbap springs to mind).

Pd comes with what the devs believe are the most useful libs with many extra just waiting to be added to the .pdrc.

Of course any extra libs you need can be compiled quite easily for pd but some of them can be tricky - I attempted to install 'cyclone' a few months ago and just gave up when it became a PITA.

One final thought, and it's something I have never heard anyone discuss at all but I have wondered about:  Is there some Euro-centric thing that vanilla is somehow 'cooler' (for want of a better word) than pde?:)

I recently ran a project on pde and have since installed pddp into my machine.  So much better set of help files I think.

All good wishes,

Julian



On 23 June 2011 23:33, Tyler Leavitt <thecryoflove@...> wrote:
Hello list,

So I'm writing this on a first boot of Puredyne 10.10 DVD-i386 alpha-4 live. Everything looks great... unetbootin installed it flawlessly and it booted nice and quick. Now to install...

My question, however, is regarding the relation between the Puredata that comes with pure:dyne and Pd-extended. What are the differences between the two as far as externals that are packaged? Is there a reason you don't just supply pd-extended? Or is it the pure:dyne version just pd-extended with the older branding?

Thanks,
Tyler

---
Puredyne@...
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

---
Puredyne@...
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Tyler Leavitt Tyler Leavitt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

@J bz - No, I was not able to install from the installer, though I had issues installing Debian 6 via usb/unetbootin also so I'm curious if it was my hardware. 

So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious to know the reasons for not using pd-extended instead of pd... 

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Jonathan Wilkes <[hidden email]> wrote:
Pd extended includes:
* a patched source so that it can include [initbang]-- which, among other things,
allows you to create abstractions that have variable inlets/outlets (like [route] does)--
and [closebang]-- which sends a bang immediately before deleting its parent canvas.
* opaque object boxes (they are light grey, I think) and lighter grey borders.
* visual difference between signal inlets/outlets and control inlets/outlets (very helpful IMO).
* different default fonts (I think)

There's also Pd-l2ork, which includes Pd extended source patches plus:
* iemguis ([bng], [vslider], etc.) which can be resized with the mouse (and labels can be
moved with mouse, too)
* way more effecient redrawing of gui objects and "Put" menu arrays
* patch that maps "$@" to expand to all arguments (from the parent patch if abstraction,
incoming message if msg box)
* more consistent Gnome-like look and feel in linux
* right-click and choose "move to back/front" to change an object's z order
* improved cyclone objects
* magic glass (hover over a connection and see the message currently being passed
over it)
* max-style trigger that takes numeric args (like [pack] )
* notification when element of a "Put" menu array is changed
* no crash when a patch sends a message to close itself, better scrolling, lots of other
fixes

Both include PDDP docs by default, which I've been working on for some time now.

Btw- I made a search gui-plugin in 0.43 that takes advantage of all the tags I added to
core docs and (many) external help files.  So now you can search for objects by keyword,
author, description, and even inlet/outlet specs (e.g., find an object that takes a symbol at its
left inlet and outputs a list).

-Jonathan

--- On Fri, 6/24/11, J bz <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: J bz <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended
To: "puredyne" <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, June 24, 2011, 11:25 AM


Hi Tyler,

Excuse me for hijacking your thread somewhat:

Have you managed to install?  I couldn't get the shortcut to respond, though it runs nice off usb for me too.

I'm not involved in packaging pure data at all but my gut feelings are that:
1. Running vanilla allows for a quicker update cycle.
2. Less bloat.
3. My preference is that vanilla is more aesthetically pleasing somehow.
4.  Historic reasons: pde was far less stable a few years ago, plus had problems with some libraries and objects not loading - nameclashes etc.  Indeed it's still the case with some libs in pde now (vbap springs to mind).

Pd comes with what the devs believe are the most useful libs with many extra just waiting to be added to the .pdrc.

Of course any extra libs you need can be compiled quite easily for pd but some of them can be tricky - I attempted to install 'cyclone' a few months ago and just gave up when it became a PITA.

One final thought, and it's something I have never heard anyone discuss at all but I have wondered about:  Is there some Euro-centric thing that vanilla is somehow 'cooler' (for want of a better word) than pde?:)

I recently ran a project on pde and have since installed pddp into my machine.  So much better set of help files I think.

All good wishes,

Julian



On 23 June 2011 23:33, Tyler Leavitt <thecryoflove@...> wrote:
Hello list,

So I'm writing this on a first boot of Puredyne 10.10 DVD-i386 alpha-4 live. Everything looks great... unetbootin installed it flawlessly and it booted nice and quick. Now to install...

My question, however, is regarding the relation between the Puredata that comes with pure:dyne and Pd-extended. What are the differences between the two as far as externals that are packaged? Is there a reason you don't just supply pd-extended? Or is it the pure:dyne version just pd-extended with the older branding?

Thanks,
Tyler

---
Puredyne@...
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne


---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
gusano gusano
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

On 06/24/2011 08:25 PM, Tyler Leavitt wrote:
> @J bz - No, I was not able to install from the installer, though I had
> issues installing Debian 6 via usb/unetbootin also so I'm curious if it
> was my hardware.
>
> So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious to know the
> reasons for not using pd-extended instead of pd...

maybe because pure:dyne is supposed to stay light sizewise (as a Live
distro that should fit a CD/USB) and pd-extended is huuge (and a bit
bloated IMHO) ??

consider also that pure:dyne devs are smart and put the most usefull
pd-libs already available in a neat pd-vanilla.

but that's just a guess ;)

cheers,
_y
---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Jonathan Wilkes Jonathan Wilkes
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended



--- On Fri, 6/24/11, gusano <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: gusano <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Friday, June 24, 2011, 8:35 PM
> On 06/24/2011 08:25 PM, Tyler Leavitt
> wrote:
> > @J bz - No, I was not able to install from the
> installer, though I had
> > issues installing Debian 6 via usb/unetbootin also so
> I'm curious if it
> > was my hardware.
> >
> > So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious
> to know the
> > reasons for not using pd-extended instead of pd...
>
> maybe because pure:dyne is supposed to stay light sizewise
> (as a Live distro that should fit a CD/USB) and pd-extended
> is huuge (and a bit bloated IMHO) ??

That's changing with 0.43.  As I understand it pd-extended should
be nearly identical to pd-vanilla (the exception being [initbang] and
[closebang] in extended), and all the libs will be available
as separate packages.  (Maybe there will still be a giant pd-ext
package as well for people who want it.)

>
> consider also that pure:dyne devs are smart and put the
> most usefull pd-libs already available in a neat
> pd-vanilla.
>
> but that's just a guess ;)
>
> cheers,
> _y
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>
---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Julian Brooks Julian Brooks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

In reply to this post by Tyler Leavitt
"So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious to know the reasons for not using pd-extended instead of pd... "

I think it's Claude Heiland-Allen and Chun Lee.

J.

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
chr chr
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

Am 27.06.2011 15:01, schrieb J bz:
"So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious to know the reasons for not using pd-extended instead of pd... "
i'm working very often with the commands -pdsend- and -pdreceive- which are not part of the pd-extended(0.42.5) package.  (-maybe in 0.43??-) pdsend is very powerful i find...

... i have always both installed (vanilla and extended) on my ubuntu-laptop. i dont know if there is a possibillity to integrate it easily in extended?
i did not found a way for using pdsend without installing vanilla too. but i'm also kind of newbie....

greetings
christian

I think it's Claude Heiland-Allen and Chun Lee.

J.
--- [hidden email] http://identi.ca/group/puredyne irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne


---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Aymeric Mansoux Aymeric Mansoux
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

In reply to this post by Julian Brooks
J bz said :
> "So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious to know the reasons
> for not using pd-extended instead of pd... "

Hurray! Ye good ol' vanilla vs extended thread ;)

It's true that when Puredyne started, extended was very young (someone
would have to check but I also think that it was first introduced for
win and macos and was only made available to Linux at a much later
stage).

Next to that there are some personal choices in using vanilla and a
reduced set of externals:

- vanilla is the reference -> decreases chances to shoot yourself in the
  foot by making patches which features relies on a specific
distribution of Pd. For example recently hc announced that he would stop
maintaining some externals in extended, which I understand perfectly
given the insane task it must be to distribute everything related to Pd
in a single convenient package for 3 different platforms.
http://puredata.info/docs/LibrariesInPdExtended/

- less is more -> we prefer working with fewer sets of externals that
  have been around for a while and well-tested. It's a choice that
influences creativity as it is a constrained process that forces us to
really explore what Pd and a few "low level" externals have to offer
instead of approaching patching from the "one feature == one external"
mindset. It makes maintaining patches easier also, etc.

- we package only stuff that we use -> so we have a direct interest in
  having it working well, which benefits to the user ultimately. Instead
of providing everything Pd related and not have time to make sure
everything works.

- we package everything in a modular way to distribute the workload and
  maintain components individually (useful if version 2 of
[cheeseburger~] is broken but version 1 is bug free which is a more
difficult thing to solve in a monolithic distribution such as extended).

Of course all of these points are personal choices, we don't hold the
truth in that regard, but it is just what works for us, both as artists
and Puredyne developers, and it is the type of "philosophy" that made
Puredyne a reliable production environment over the past years. YMMV ;)

That said, there have been some attempts in the past to coordinate
efforts and convince other Pd dev to join Puredyne Pd packaging in a
modular approach on Debian based systems.
http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2009-04/013415.html

Sadly enough it did not happen, despite our call. I can't really explain
why. We were too early? Both side were a bit territorial in the way
things should be led? Does not matter. Everyone moves on.

The good news though is that a few Pd dev have very recently started to
package externals as part of the Debian multimedia team community in
such a modular way and hopefully it will allow the user choose what
she/he wants on her/his system while providing higher quality binaries
of externals. Everyone will greatly benefit from it and will make our
isolated work redundant, which is a good thing as duplicating efforts is
just nonsense in such small communities.

Concerning the documentation side of Pd extended, I can't really tell as
most of the Pd documentation needs of Puredyne were driven by GOTO10
workshops (mostly around 2006-2008) and we had our own tutorials for
that. For instance: https://code.goto10.org/hg/index.cgi/canvas/file/

About the interface changes, this is my *own* opinion: I don't care
about fancy looking objects, custom fonts and all kind of visual
improvements. I remember Frank Barknecht, years ago, saying that it
forces you to patch well and not dive into sloppy spaghetti patching,
relying on visual feedback to keep track of what is going on. I stand by
this argument big time. For those who wanted how to play with the
interface it was also covered by checking the different hacks from
Carmen.

Of course there are some improvements to be made though on the keyboard
side, I love what Chun and Matju did on the dd branch, a long time ago,
to allow complete keyboard driven patching. I hope that Yvan Volochine
can port some of this stuff in his plugin, this is a *real* feature, and
would be a shame to have this work lost. Unfortunately it is unlikely
that we provide 0.43 for Gazpacho, so no plugin for now (to reply to
another mail).


> I think it's Claude Heiland-Allen and Chun Lee.

Yes, initially it was all of us, but as the development of Puredyne
increased in complexity, things got more specialized and at the moment
Claude and Chun are doing all the work.

a.
--
http://su.kuri.mu

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended



These issues I can think of:

Devs who are working in the low level code sometimes
see packaging as "donkey work".

In fact Debian packaging is extraordinarily long
learning curve to do well, even with helper tools.
It requires a big picture understanding of how distros
are structured.

Having been through some of that myself on the long
road to learning Debian development I can see how
those who are also in the thick of DSP work found
it a strain to put on both hats. I must confess
I found it a strain myself on a current commercial
project.

So there's a contradiction/tension

1) A project like pd-extended is such a complex beast, like
a distro in itself, it needs packagers with a deep internal
knowledge.

2) Anyone involved in dev full time, enough to
have a good understanding of extended structure, is consumed
by the complexity of the low level coding tasks.

It's basically a big demand.

The (human... rather than add more systems) answer I can
think of is not to look for one or two gifted individuals
but find a programming pairs, or groups, preferably friends
in the same city, with complementary skills.





On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:21:41 +0200
Aymeric Mansoux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Sadly enough it did not happen, despite our call. I can't really explain
> why. We were too early? Both side were a bit territorial in the way
> things should be led? Does not matter. Everyone moves on.

--
Andy Farnell <[hidden email]>
---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Igor Medeiros Igor Medeiros
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

my 0.2 cents here:

i like puredyne because i know it's going to work --
i use it mainly for puredata and supercollider.

there's not another plug-n-play distro with supercollider with almost all quarks/ugens -
i decide to use puredyne to try supercollider, and got really happy everything is there.
i don't have a mac and the quarks/ugens for windows are too complicated to install, and not all the quarks/ugens work yet on windows.

i am slowly learning to interact supercollider with another apps for image control --
puredata and fluxus are my main focus here, since they both work great with 3D/OpenGL,
but i always have used pd-extended for externals on the video side, just remembering pd-pidip here...

since puredyne is made for easy setup (i run mine from usb, always work in a lot of different computers) and with installations on mind i suggest to keep pd-extended with more externals.
a more complete set of tools will take more time to ajust, but also can make some people to try different possibilities on patches.
trying others' people patches can expand ideas on how to work also -- a great teaching/learning tool.

thx all devs that makes this distro possible!

---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Jonathan Wilkes Jonathan Wilkes
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended

In reply to this post by Aymeric Mansoux


--- On Tue, 6/28/11, Aymeric Mansoux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Aymeric Mansoux <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [puredyne] Puredata vs. Pd-extended
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011, 11:21 AM
> J bz said :
> > "So who packages pd for pure:dyne then? I'd be curious
> to know the reasons
> > for not using pd-extended instead of pd... "
>
> Hurray! Ye good ol' vanilla vs extended thread ;)
>

[...]

> Concerning the documentation side of Pd extended, I can't
> really tell as
> most of the Pd documentation needs of Puredyne were driven
> by GOTO10
> workshops (mostly around 2006-2008) and we had our own
> tutorials for
> that. For instance: https://code.goto10.org/hg/index.cgi/canvas/file/

Question: What happens in Puredyne when you run Pd, type "vsnapshot~" in an object box, and right-click on it and choose "Help"?

>
> About the interface changes, this is my *own* opinion: I
> don't care
> about fancy looking objects, custom fonts and all kind of
> visual
> improvements. I remember Frank Barknecht, years ago, saying
> that it
> forces you to patch well and not dive into sloppy spaghetti
> patching,
> relying on visual feedback to keep track of what is going
> on. I stand by
> this argument big time. For those who wanted how to play
> with the
> interface it was also covered by checking the different
> hacks from
> Carmen.
>
> Of course there are some improvements to be made though on
> the keyboard
> side, I love what Chun and Matju did on the dd branch, a
> long time ago,
> to allow complete keyboard driven patching. I hope that
> Yvan Volochine
> can port some of this stuff in his plugin, this is a *real*
> feature, and
> would be a shame to have this work lost. Unfortunately it
> is unlikely
> that we provide 0.43 for Gazpacho, so no plugin for now (to
> reply to
> another mail).
>
>
> > I think it's Claude Heiland-Allen and Chun Lee.
>
> Yes, initially it was all of us, but as the development of
> Puredyne
> increased in complexity, things got more specialized and at
> the moment
> Claude and Chun are doing all the work.
>
> a.
> --
> http://su.kuri.mu
>
> ---
> [hidden email]
> http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
> irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
>
---
[hidden email]
http://identi.ca/group/puredyne
irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
Loading...