Steve;<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">If you start throwing ckx files in there, it becomes much more<br>
complicated. "This program works with real ChucK, with this and that<br>
extension loaded, which you can go download from this guy's website",<br>
etc. That's why I thought it would be prudent to create a community<br>
edition that allows people to get their code in to a central location,<br>
without putting any overhead on the ChucK team.<br>
</blockquote><div><br>I see your point but wouldn't a "include" feature risk the same? I think we all agree that inclusions would be extremely useful for managing larger ChucK projects and I think we agree it would be a waste of time for me to re-write something you already created. So; I'd point to your site or re-distribute your code (assuming it would allow for that), packing it all up in a archive file.<br>
<br>I'm not sure I'd have a real problem with plugins, assuming we could have cross-platform ones. Popular/stable/useful ones could be distributed with ChucK or even merged into it.<br><br>These are hard questions but right now I feel that a central repository of "useful things to be shared" will be unavoidable and indeed a useful and probably fun thing to have in the future. For UGens in the current situation I still think a "experimental" and a "stable" version is the most practical idea on the table so far.<br>
</div></div><br>Yours,<br>Kas.<br>