[linux-audio-dev] Anyone planned a GTK2-based Multitracker?

[Richard Bown]

On Saturday 10 April 2004 08:09, Dave Robillard wrote:

> Rosegarded depends on KDE.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not militantly anti-qt
> (or KDE, or anything without good reason), but I simply can't afford to be
> running two desktop environments worth of crap at the same time, especially
> just for one app.

Well, it's just the kde-libs.  Are you telling me you don't run any KDE apps 
at the same time as your GNOME apps?  I'm prepared to believe you don't but 
I'd suggest that your hardware not being powerful enough to run both is a 
pretty poor excuse for suggesting a whole new project.

Anyway, what's the problem with having audio stuff in a sequencer?  If you 
don't want to use it then don't - that's the beauty of it all isn't it?  
Sounds like you haven't even tried it while deciding that Ardour is the only 
solution.  I agree that Ardour does audio really well, but it's not to 
everyone's taste is it?  Just as Protools isn't the only DAW that people use.

> ... Are you serious?  The CLUE quotient?  What, because I think a MIDI
> sequencer that's simply focused on being a good MIDI sequencer is a good
> idea I need a CLUE?  (This coming from a guy who has taken a "six month
> break" from LAD, and is impying that _I_ need to read a FAQ)

Well like I said there isn't a FAQ but there should be.

I notice from the LAD list blurb:

"The linux-audio-dev list is unmoderated and open for everybody.
Note that the signal to noise ratio is extremely high on this list, and we 
would like to keep it that way."

Harumph.

> I'll keep my opinion of you and your comments to myself for obvious
> reasons. I will however suggest trying to not be so blatently RUDE and
> INSULTING, and maybe contributing something useful to the discussions at
> hand.  (Not to mention basing your comments on what people actually say
> instead of outlandish assumptions on your part)

I'm not insulting you - only your suggestion.  I think your effort would be 
better spent on the mailing lists of existing sequencer projects rather than 
just suggesting another new one.

> Anyway, since I apparently have to specifically ask for agruments or facts
> out of you, instead of just ignorant uninformed bashing of my intelligence
> with no justification, what exactly was ill-informed about my 'argument'?

Sounds to me like you've not even tried what is out there already - you're 
just waving your hand and saying "Oh, that's Qt/KDE", "Oh that has audio" 
etc.  So what if it does?  Do you not think your time would be better spent 
improving what has come this far rather than starting _another_ project from 
scratch?  Have you seen the number of dead or stillborn projects on 
Sourceforge?   It takes years for these projects to mature - Rosegarden (the 
project as a whole, not the latest incarnation) is 10 years old now.  Do you 
really think you're the first person to have these amazing ideas?  Do you see 
how I get bored of reading these recursive threads about how great it'd be if 
only these things did this?

The main thing I'm suggesting here is that you or anyone else who wants to 
start another sequencer project just help out with an existing one.  
Personally I'd like you to tell us what Rosegarden _doesn't_ do for you - 
slag it off, break it, complain about it.  Just don't ignore it.  If you've 
got good reasons why it doesn't do what you want it to at a fundamental level 
then fine - I've seen no such arguments from you yet.

I'm insulting you by telling you this and you're insulting me by ignoring all 
the hard work that a lot of good people have already put in.  If at the end 
of the day you plain don't like it - fine - but at least give it a go.

R