[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Sc-devel] adding UGens / classes



I am not saying you - 'you' are off line.
I am replying to the devil's advocate argument =)

x

On Nov 27, 2007 8:45 AM, Scott Wilson <i@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 27 Nov 2007, at 13:18, blackrain wrote:
>
> > What does BufGrain give you that TGrains doesn't?
> > if you have to ask this then you prolly have to really use them to
> > tell. Pretty much like asking why would you need *yet* another lpf
> > when we have one - why a moog yada yada.
> > sorry totally off line scott.
> >
> > x
> >
>
> Well, if it's a case of 'just another flavour', then I'm not sure
> that's a compelling argument for inclusion.
>
> If you're saying I'm 'out of line' rather than 'off line', I'm not
> sure why. I'm not arguing against the idea that variants are useful.
> I make variants myself. But Josh's original post was about whether we
> should include these UGens in the distro.
>
> Another LPF or moog is likely to be useful to some, but we don't add
> every LPF that someone comes up with to svn. Some things should be
> Quarks (once this is worked out for UGens) or separate downloads.
>
> That's what I thought we were talking about.
>
>
> S.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sc-devel mailing list
> Sc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/sc-devel
>