Hallo, guenter geiger hat gesagt: // guenter geiger wrote:

I think, patches should be done to specific versions. When 0.38 is stable, patches should be done only against the latest released 0.38 version. The goal of patches is to make it easier to get them into main Pd. Really experimental stuff doesn't need to have a patch against stable, I think. Of course, a patch would be nice, but it's not so urgent. Bugfixes need a patch. However before some new features are submitted to inclusion into main Pd, there must be a patch, IMO.

It will make it easier for everyone in the end, not only for Miller as maintainer of Pd stable. For example: I might need to run a stable Pd for performing, but I'd like to use the ALSA sequencer support. I can apply this patch on my own and I don't need to run devel_XX, which can be unstable, and I don't need to run Miller's test versions, which also normally have more bugs in it, than the last released version. I only apply the aseq patch and only risk bugs there. The same applies to packagers. ALSA sequencer support is very, very useful for e.g. A/Demudi, so they can (Guenther did) include it in the package.

That, IMO, is the main advantage of having a patch tracker. And other projects work like this, too, for example the Linux kernel. Without a patch, nothing gets into the kernel. OTOH distributions like Suse supply heavily patched kernel versions, even Debian delivers some patches for kernels, which add support for hardware etc.

Ciao