<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi Ariel,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Something is very strange. I made a new release (4.5.1) of STK in 22 February 2016. My process (similar to what I have done for RtAudio and RtMidi) should have been to first create a release in github and then upload that to the CCRMA site (I don’t maintain two separate versions). If you look at what the release notes say, they are the same. But for some reason, the date on the release in github says 2 May 2014!! And it looks like you made a release (4.5.2) on 12 May 2014. That is simply weird.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">To be honest, I don’t use git enough to easily (quickly) go back and figure out what happened but something got messed up in the recent past. Why does it show you making a release 4.5.2?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Stephen, do you have any insight on this?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regards,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">—gary</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Aug 8, 2016, at 6:34 AM, Ariel Elkin <<a href="mailto:arielelkin@gmail.com" class="">arielelkin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Hi Gary,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Then it looks like there might be a discrepancy in the STK's distribution channels...</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On the CCRMA website, the current release is 4.5.1 and dates from February 2016</div><div class=""><a href="https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/download.html" class="">https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/download.html</a><br class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On GitHub, the current release is 4.5.2 and is actually two years old: </div><div class=""><a href="https://github.com/thestk/stk/releases" class="">https://github.com/thestk/stk/releases</a> <br class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Messy. We're forking ourselves. Must be be tidied up. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Can we agree that there can only be one and only one canonical version of the STK? User should always legitimately assume that all distribution channels serve exactly the same copy of the software. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The first thing we should do is figure out the differences between the codebase on the CCRMA website and the codebase on GitHub:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Download both:</div><div class=""><a href="https://github.com/thestk/stk/archive/master.zip" class="">https://github.com/thestk/stk/archive/master.zip</a><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/release/stk-4.5.1.tar.gz" class="">http://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/release/stk-4.5.1.tar.gz</a><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Unzip them, then run:</div><div class="">$opendiff ~/Downloads/stk-master ~/Downloads/stk-4.5.1</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">you'll notice that the delta is slight to the extent, I believe, that it would be justified to discard the CCRMA version:</div><div class="">* .gitignore added to GitHub version</div><div class="">* CCRMA version spells "CoreMIDI" as "CoreMidi" in <a href="http://configure.ac/" class="">configure.ac</a>, src/RtMidi.cpp, and in doc/doxygen (CoreMIDI should be preferred as acronyms are capitalised)<br class=""></div><div class="">* CCRMA version adds doc/html (redundant as they're available online)</div><div class="">* CCRMA version adds projects/examples/libMakefile (redundant as GitHub also has it as libMakefile.in in same directory)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Clearly, 4.5.1 on CCRMA has been superseded by 4.5.2 on GitHub. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Moving forwards:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* I believe that the code on the CCRMA website should mirror the one on GitHub, because all the development, issue-tracking, and pull-requests is done on GitHub. The code is developed on GitHub, it should originate from GitHub, the CCRMA website can then mirror it (or just link to it). I think we can discard the CCRMA version, and have the download page (<a href="https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/download.html" class="">https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/download.html</a>) simply link to the GitHub repo (the changelog is useful and can be transferred to a CHANGELOG file we'd add to the repo)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* Given that 55 commits have accumulated since GitHub's 4.5.1 release two years ago, we should make a new release on GitHub. (On a general note, every version number change should be a release, but making a release actually only involves pushing a tag to the repository, GitHub automatically creates the release for us). </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Also, I'd be happy to manage new releases and can push 4.6.0 now with the 55 commits that have accumulated :-)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thoughts?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regarding issues, many are indeed stagnant, I'll ping the owners so that we can move forwards with them or close them.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Ariel</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Gary Scavone <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:gary@ccrma.stanford.edu" target="_blank" class="">gary@ccrma.stanford.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class="">Hi Ariel,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks for the offer to help. The current release is only about 6 months old, which is fairly “new” from my perspective. And unless I’m missing something, there has only been one merged pull request since then. The two pending pull requests have been replied to but I didn’t get subsequent feedback from the contributors. My feeling is that #58 is not a bug but rather based on the contributor using the class in an incorrect way.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There are several “issues", but I don’t know when I would be able to address them. In general, if someone wants something fixed, they should fix it themselves and then submit a pull request.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There have been a number of updates to the RtMidi and RtAudio classes, but again, I’m not sure they are significant enough to substantiate a new release.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regards,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">—gary</div><div class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><span class=""><div class="">On Aug 3, 2016, at 8:36 AM, Ariel Elkin <<a href="mailto:arielelkin@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="">arielelkin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class=""></span><div class=""><div class=""><div class="h5"><div dir="ltr" class=""><font size="3" class="">Hi all,</font><div class=""><font size="3" class=""><br class=""></font></div><div class=""><font size="3" class="">Several bug fixes and improvements have been accumulating since v4.5.2, it'd be good to draft a new release. </font></div><div class=""><font size="3" class=""><br class=""></font></div><div class=""><font size="3" class="">Also, two pull requests need to be reviewed:</font></div><div class=""><font size="3" class=""><a href="https://github.com/thestk/stk/pulls" target="_blank" class="">https://github.com/thestk/stk/<wbr class="">pulls</a><br class=""></font></div><div class=""><font size="3" class=""><br class=""></font></div><div class=""><font size="3" class="">And i</font><span style="font-size:inherit" class="">ssues have also been accumulating:</span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size:inherit" class=""><a href="https://github.com/thestk/stk/issues" target="_blank" class="">https://github.com/thestk/stk/<wbr class="">issues</a></span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size:inherit" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size:inherit" class="">As far as I'm concerned, I can </span><span style="font-size:inherit" class="">(as always) </span><span style="font-size:inherit" class="">provide all the support needed for iOS, but I don't have (at this stage) the required background knowledge for maintaining an STK project on OS X, nor a Linux or Windows machine for development. </span><span style="font-size:inherit" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size:inherit" class=""><br class="">So I think it would be good if </span><span style="font-size:inherit" class="">we clarify who is responsible for dealing with new issues, pull requests, and overall maintenance. This would make maintenance and development more efficient in the long term.</span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size:inherit" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div class=""><span style="font-size:inherit" class="">Ariel</span></div></div></div></div><span class="">
______________________________<wbr class="">_________________<br class="">Stk mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Stk@ccrma.stanford.edu" target="_blank" class="">Stk@ccrma.stanford.edu</a><br class=""><a href="https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/stk" target="_blank" class="">https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/<wbr class="">mailman/listinfo/stk</a><br class=""></span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>