[LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

james morris james at jwm-art.net
Sun Aug 9 11:25:09 UTC 2009


On 8/8/2009, "Raymond Martin" <laseray at gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday 08 August 2009 15:59:56 you wrote:
>> On 08/09/2009 06:05 AM, Raymond Martin wrote:
>> > On Saturday 08 August 2009 15:44:41 drew Roberts wrote:
>> >> On Saturday 08 August 2009 14:25:37 Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>> >>> Sorry but how exactly is this different from a fork?  Is there a guide
>> >>> that you have read somewhere that explains the exact steps required for
>> >>> making a fork? Why have you now decided that you are not actually
>> >>> forking the project when you originally declared that was the intended
>> >>> result of your efforts?
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps his stated intention was to fork but his point is that at this
>> >> point at least, no fork exists? Perhaps at this point, all that exists
>> >> is the original binary and a decompiled version of the source? (Along
>> >> with new text documents? Guessing here from the threads, not from
>> >> checking either of the projects.)
>> >
>> > There is no decompiled source anywhere on the project. It is all code
>> > straight from the original Impro-Visor on SF.
>>
>> Ok, Just to get this straight in my head.
>>
>> After you decompiled the code and threatened to put the results of your
>> labour online as a fork which encouraged Bob Keller to finally publish
>> the code in a public repo you have now taken that code and changed it
>> just a little bit, given it exactly the same name and are hosting it at
>> the same location as the official public release?
>
>That is what is there for now. So lots of people have been complaining about
>nothing.
>
>Raymond

When is the Raymond show moving to the improvisor mailing lists? Not all
of us have the luxury of email filtering and are too simple minded and
undisciplined to continually resist temptation every goddamn hour to see
if our anti-hero is going to admit to ever being wrong.



More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list