Linux-audio-dev January 2004

linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

94 participants
90 discussions

[linux-audio-dev] Re: [Consortium-p] Re: linuxaudio.org

by Marek Peteraj

On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 12:09, andrea.glorioso(a)agnula.org wrote: > Daniel James <daniel(a)linuxaudio.org> writes: > > >> Is there any chance you'd postpone it and announce the project and > >> the beta site on lad for further discussing before launching it? > > > > No. As I've already explained, my view is that membership of a > > particular mailing list does not confer veto rights over any project > > that happens to have the words Linux and Audio in its name. > > [snipping a lot of stuff] > > I honestly can't understand what the fuss is all about. If someone > wants to contribute, well, just contribute. > > If we failed to contact every possible linux audio developer around, > just drop a note that *you* are going to contact him and put the list > in Cc:. done. > > If you feel the rules are not the most equitable possible, suggest > (practical) modifications. > > If you feel that a more "community-oriented" approach (whatever that > means) is due, I'm sure we can officially create a "community > relationship" position inside the Consortium. ? "The consortium aims to co-ordinate joint projects between members, collaborate on the promotion of Linux based systems for audio tasks, and provide a single point of contact for both prospective Linux users and industry partners." IIUC it should serve and protect the community and its members. Isn't LAD such single point of contact? Who are you trying to help? > > If you feel that <FILL IN THE BLANKS>, well, you're welcome to give > your help. > > Oh, and a small hint: there is people in here who have bben around > from *before* 1999, so - even assuming that "being around" and "doing > the right thing" have a cause-effect relationship - nobody is going to > be impressed by a somewhat "veteran" attitude. All i wanted to say is, i see LAD and LAU as the *only* place for linux audio community(not because i say so but because it *evolved* in such place) and the community as the authority. > > I hope we can stop this childish attitude and actually get some work > done (this is usually the moment when people start to disappear). So keeping such projects confidential until "ready", and not accepting a community place although it's been here from 1997 or so isn't childish? Marek

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] Re: linuxaudio.org

by Marek Peteraj

On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 11:43, Daniel James wrote: > > Is there any chance you'd postpone it and announce the project and > > the beta site on lad for further discussing before launching it? > > No. As I've already explained, my view is that membership of a > particular mailing list does not confer veto rights over any project > that happens to have the words Linux and Audio in its name. > > > Unfortunately, not much people did know about it, except those > > you've contacted. > > er... perhaps that's because I haven't made the initial public > announcement yet, which will go out tomorrow. I've been working on > this for less than two weeks, and some things take a few days to > prepare. I could help with that. I didn't know about that. > > > there are lots of people who would like to > > contribute to such project and lots of people with great ideas on > > how to move on. It's just different when you make decisions on your > > own. > > We obviously have very different ideas about project management. Where > would the Linux kernel be if Linus hadn't started it by himself? (not > that I'm comparing my technical ability to Linus's for one moment.) > The alternative is to pre-announce the project, then form a committee > to discuss the issues for 20 years or more - examples would be > Xanadu, or GNU Hurd, or the lean and stable version of Windows. > > I know from experience with libre software, wireless networks and many > other areas that it's all very well talking about a project, but if > there isn't one or two people to actually do the work then it won't > happen. You can call it leadership if you like, but I'm not out to > found a dictatorship here. I just happen to be the only person who > bothered registering the domain name and committed to seeing the > project through to launch. > > > Discussion is what shapes a project > > No, action shapes a project. Discussion without action is just a > pressure wave in air. > > > The problem is that we should follow > > basic principles of democracy. This didn't happen. > > I think you're pre-judging an organisation that hasn't even launched > yet. If you read the Policy page of the website, you'll see I have > deliberately set up an organisation with a management board made up > of members representatives, which oversees the Director. > > > Did any voting > > happen? > > Not yet. > > > Any discussion? > > Yes. > > > You have obeyed lots of lad members by not > > asking them. > > I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean here. > > > My intention was based on following principles: > > > > 1. inform about plans, ideas > > 2. discuss, try to form conclusions > > 3. take action > > You've still got time to take action. > > > Seems like you'd like to go the other way around. > > Actually, I don't see project management working in such a linear > fashion. There has to be 1, 2 and 3 happening in parallel. > > > The problem is that the name 'linux audio' actually *represents* > > both the linux audio developer community and the linux audio user > > community > > Not at all. Neither linux.com or linux.org have any special status in > the Linux community - they're just domain names. > > > both meet at a common place which is the lad or lau > > mailing list. It's where the discussion takes place > > But not the action? > > > Second problem is to find a way for new users and developers to > > find everything they need related to linux audio *and* to make it a > > meeting point, or even provide necessary resources to help new > > audio projects grow. > > Personally, I saw little value in replicating the work of existing > sites, or creating an all-encompassing portal. Exactly, 'personally' is your problem. > > > > The key is the name of the domain. It's > > www.linuxaudio.org. > > Not any more, I'm afraid. If you wanted that domain name six months > ago you should have registered it then. It doesn't matter who registers the site. > > > The problem is lots of people won't find what > > they actually wanted to find on such place. > > Until a couple of weeks ago there was nothing at all there, so I hope > this site will be an improvement. > > > The consortium isn't the most necesary solution that will boost > > linux audio > > I disagree. If you don't want to co-operate, you are free to start a > better project. > > > it's not something people might find interesting > > if they want to know about linux audio. > > The new user might be better off at other sites, it's true. > linux-sound.org or djcj.org already exist. > > > It's > > 1. providing information, > > 2. providing a meeting place for devs and users, > > 3. providing necesary resources, similar to sf.net > > That's your project, not mine. No-one is stopping you doing that. > > > the members should be *natural persons*, lad > > members, and the organisation should be focused on the *community*, > > not on companies. > > Again, you're talking about a different project. As for companies, who > do you think employs members of the community to work on Linux audio? > Linuxaudio.org gives libre software projects and companies equal > status - that's pretty rare for an industry body. > > > The > > organisation should exist to protect the interests of the LAD > > community. > > As defined by yourself? Are you kidding me? Who's the one taking action? Did i suggest to take a look at xiph foundation or gnome foundation...? > All I'm trying to do here is bring people > together for mutual benefit, be they manufacturers, developers, or > users. > > > That's why i *strongly* suggest - let's postpone it. Let's > > discuss it. Let's make a decision at ZKM LAD meeting 2004 :) > > I can't do that now. You're demanding veto power again. ?? > > > But a formal org. has no meaning if it isn't governed by law. > > Plenty of important Linux-related organisations aren't legal entities. > If it proves necessary later, we can go down that path. > > > How > > should it act and protect the interests of lad community? > > We'll find out after the launch. > > > time to start a organisation - a foundation consisting > > of lad members. > > If you look at the current membership list you'll see they mostly are > LAD members already. > > > The question is not whether it's > > *yours* or *mine*. > > I'm afraid it is, because you're trying to impose your decisions on > me. > > > The point is that it's an *acknowledged* place > > Yes, for discussion among developers - Linuxaudio.org is both > different and complementary to the LAD list. > > > every little thign > > happened to be discussed there, teh name of jack, the logo of lad, > > the content of www.linuxaudiodev.org site, the LAD meetings etc and > > i'm just mentioning thing which aren't related to coding > > That's hardly everything. Let me be explicit about the limitations of > the current set-up. > > 1. Generally, very poor relations between hardware manufacturers and > LAD community. You'd think that anyone writing a driver, or otherwise > offering gratis support for the audio hardware of a particular > manufacturer, would be welcomed with open arms. Not so - hackers > can't even get full specs sometimes, let alone technical partnership > or 'free as in beer' test kit. > > 2. Fragmentation - what organisation there is, is informal. Companies > that want to have better relations with the LAD community don't know > where to start. Result - those companies aren't taking Linux based > audio products to the mainstream. Also see 1. above. Do you think they will - without any users? > > 3. Developers are busy. They don't always have the time or skills to > do advocacy, write articles for magazines or organise public events. > The result is that advocacy just isn't being done as much as it could > be. Linux has been around more than a decade, but it hasn't been > until this year that we'll see the first appearance of libre software > at audio industry trade shows. > > If the linuxaudio.org project intends to have official status, then > > you should *first* take LAD and ZKM conference seriously > > I do. They have a certain amount of natural authority. > > > as > > something with official status. > > You're just wrong here. They have no official status which allows them > to dictate how advocacy is done - neither do you. So you do have official status then? > > > By not doing that, you're actually completely careless about the > > entire LAD community. > > I think you're just complaining because you feel like the last to know > > - even though it doesn't even launch until tomorrow. In the > pre-launch phase, I've discussed linuxaudio.org with every LAD member > that I know. > > > So how come you're the director of a consortium before lots of > > linux audio people know about it > > Lots of Linux audio people do know about it. The reason I made myself > the director is that someone has to take responsibility, and put in > the hours of unpaid work it requires to launch the project. If you > read the Policy page you'll see that the director has to answer to > the management board, which means I can easily be replaced after the > launch. > > > a director of a consortium > > which you wouldn't even think of if those people didn't develop > > such apps? > > I took this unpaid job on because no-one else was doing it. Did you ask anybody? Any voting? > So far, > I'm funding linuxaudio.org out of my own pocket. I'm quite aware of > the fundamental contribution of libre software developers to the > systems I use, which is why they have equal weight with companies on > the linuxaudio.org management board. Sorry but 'equal' just isn't the right word for it, 95% vs. 5% would be. > > > Woudln't it be better if those people we're acting in > > such position? > > LAD members have had plenty of time to set up an organisation of this > nature, and none of them have. What does that tell you? What should it tell me? > > > Are you sure you're protecting the interests of the > > community? > > Quite sure. Now please stop trolling and make a positive contribution. Sorry. I didn't know that criticism = trolling for you. > > Cheers > > Daniel James > Director > http://linuxaudio.org > > Marek

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] [admin] user list is members-only....

by Joern Nettingsmeier

hello everyone! there are a number of messages from LAD contributors who are not subscribed to LAU in the LAU moderation queue. my current policy is to reject them, which i hate to do, because they are helpful replies with useful information. the problem is: i don't have the time to check whether the poster has re-sent them already using another (subscribed) account, and if i just accept all postings whose senders i recognize, there will be duplicate messages. so please, LAD patrons: do subscribe to LAU. you can disable mail delivery if you want to reduce the load on your inbox, but you will be able to crosspost. unfortunately, there is no feature in mailman to allow all LAD subscribers to post to LAU, or i'd use it. best, jörn -- "I never use EQ, never, never, never. I previously used to use mic positioning but I've even given up on that too." - Jezar on http://www.audiomelody.com Jörn Nettingsmeier Kurfürstenstr 49, 45138 Essen, Germany http://spunk.dnsalias.org (my server) http://www.linuxaudiodev.org (Linux Audio Developers)

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] linuxmusician.com: a website of sorts

by Chris Cannam

Quite a long time ago now, Richard Bown and I decided we were going to set up a sort of magazine website for musicians using Linux. It wouldn't be a developer site or a pro-audio site or even particularly a technology site, it would just be a site for individuals who were interested in doing music. We registered the name linuxmusician.com, and then, inevitably, contrived to do absolutely nothing at all with it for the next eighteen months. It became very clear very quickly, as always, that we simply wouldn't have the time to write a substantial amount of material for it. The subsequent appearance of the handy QuickToots site at djcj.org also seemed to reduce the need for some of the content we'd been hoping to write or solicit. Recently though we decided that enough was enough, and that we should just launch the damn thing with the few contributions we could make plus a community article-submission facility and at the least give it the chance to flop gracelessly instead of never being launched at all. So one install of Mambo later, and we present http://www.linuxmusician.com/ At the moment there is one (1) complete article on there, plus two brief stubs of articles; there's a links page with hardly any links yet, and a copy of the bownie.com Guide to Home Recording. We will continue to post stuff that we come up with, but also if you take a moment to register you are then very welcome to submit articles, news, and links. It's not a complete slash/scoop-style community moderation system; for example, there's currently no comment system at all. But we're very open to ideas and concoctions that other people might want to suggest. Chris

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] [ANN] Visecas 0.3.1

by Jan Weil

Hello lists, I am pleased to announce the initial release of Visecas 0.3.1. Visecas is a graphical user interface (GTK+) for Ecasound [http://eca.cx/ecasound], a software package written by Kai Vehmanen which is designed for multitrack audio processing. It aims to provide full access to all Ecasound's object by preserving Ecasound's semantic (which means you do not edit tracks and regions but chains and audio objects). Please visit Visecas' webpage at http://visecas.sourceforge.net This release includes the following features: * start Visecas as you would start Ecasound (all arguments are passed on) * display and control chainsetup's status (valid, connected, looped, etc.) * add, remove, rename, mute, bypass chains * add, remove, attach audio objects * add, remove, control operators * control chainsetup position via hscale * display and control engine status * edit Ecasound's preferences Have fun! Jan

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] [ANN] galan-0.3.0-beta1 released

by torbenh＠gmx.de

hi guys... the current discussion on the modular synths reminded me, that i should announce the new 0.3.0-beta1 Version. from the discussion it becomes apparrent, that many people dont know gAlan. - use this version with jack to stay happy. - a controlpanel can now have a custom picture as background. - the sub component library needs to get tidied up - LADSPA plugins differ from native plugins in that they only provide standard controls. - array events - fft plugin - sampler can receive an array. i know that galan evolves too slow, but i need to get my university done. -- torben Hohn http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] [Fwd: linuxaudio.org]

by Marek Peteraj

I'm forwarding my first email so that the lad jury can decide whether it's my personal agenda. I can post the second one aswell in case anybody is interested. Let me know what you think. Marek

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] Re: linuxaudio.org

by holborn

Hi! My two cents: For me, any kind or consortium, coorporation or what ever you want who promote the use of audio with linux was a good idea, i hope this can help to their members (projects) to be really competitive. That will be good for all. But .... i have an ethical question with the use of this domain name, hope in the future will be useful for all the linux users, with that name probaly many people go to this domain serching audio solutions, and hope they will find and don't lost their time. And that is a big effort for any kind of project. I think this kind o domain name need to be a project supported by the members, not a members supported by the project. Josep

21 years, 2 months

Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: linuxaudio.org

by Tim Orford

hi Daniel Thanks for replying. I do hope you find this thread constructive. While we have a different emphasise on some things, i think our aims are broadly similar, and i dont mean to harangue you:-) actually i hesitate to send this mail as i guess it is preventing you from making your case properly. I think i made my initial point re open discussions, and the thread has mostly moved onto other areas that i dont have such strong feelings about. But anyway here goes..:-) On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 05:27:07PM +0000, Daniel James wrote: > > the problem for me is that it purports to represent linux pro audio > > in general > > Only as far as it represents its members - what's wrong with that? > > I am trying to work with everyone here. However, the feeling I'm > getting is that certain LAD mailing list members believe they have > some kind of proprietary ownership over the whole area, by virtue of > membership of a mailing list alone. That I find bizarre. i dont see that. I think people are just expressing concern over developments which undermine the list. Its not about 'ownership' or 'rights', just about respect and building a commons. but I can understand some of the more serious players finding the list relatively amateurish, and desiring to move to a more serious front, but i hope that doesnt backfire. Personnally i would hate to see development fragmented any more than at present. I imagine this list is a good way to draw in new or potential developers. > > > sound engineers are not organised as either projects or companies. > > So can i join? > > We'll have to find some way that individuals can get involved. I'm > very open to suggestions. > > > You cannot work with a corporation on an "equitable basis". You > > lick their asses till they hand over the money. > > Well, that's not the way I usually work, personally speaking. I'm not what do companies have if not money and resources? > sure you can divide corporations into good and bad so easily. Let's > bear in mind that many of the companies working on Linux audio are > very small. ok, i'm possibly using the word corporation wrongly. I will use the term large company instead. I have nothing against small companies, only large ones. And i agree that there is indeed some chance of an equitable relationship with a small company that doesnt have a large market share (and corresponding lack of influence). but i'm not clear which companies you are trying to court and why. > > > > So far, Microsoft has not asked > > > to join. > > > > I'm not sure what we are sposed to make of that statement. > > File under attempts at humour. i'll try and lighten up:-) > > > pro audio is way behind mainstream linux concerns. > > Quite. Let's see what we can do to help change that. > > > I dont see it > > happening, but i dont want eg Steinberg here. > > If they want to produce a Linux based product, I'm afraid they can do > it without your permission - that's libre software for you. of course. But the question is not whether it will happen but whether it should be encouraged. > > > Both the scale and the principle are different. OSDL and CELF are > > 'selling' their 'product' to large-scale enterprises and hence need > > a corporately acceptable face. With the exception of some media > > companies, audio users are either individuals or companies of less > > than 10. > > Most businesses are small, audio or not. Windows got to where it is > today on the small business desktop, not through the 'enterprise'. > Besides, just because professional-quality audio tools exist on Linux > does not mean that they will be used exclusively by professionals. but large corps are where the money is. If you get a nice contract with IBM, Disney, Germany, you are set! so do you disagree that OSDL and CELF are aimed at large companies? I'm asking cos I dont know. i take it then that you want to target small companies? > > You are presenting it as a done deal. > > No, I'm presenting the beginning of a possibility. > > > You already have > > a web page and a large number of members > > What would you say if there were no web page and no members? 'Not much > of a project?' i certainly wouldnt say that. > > > who have apparently agreed > > to some fairly strong legal commitments. > > The membership policies have little legal weight - they are just an > expression of good faith. No-one has signed anything yet. :-) > > > 1-project coordination. a consortium should mainly concern itself > > with represention to the outside world. Cooperation > > should be handled using normal open development methods, imo. > > Sure, but you have to get people to agree to do open development > first. > > > 2-promotion. Agreed that this could be useful in the future. > > That's the main focus of what I am doing personally, taking Linux to > audio industry trade shows. > > > Currently i believe promotion should be aimed at developers not > > users. > > There's plenty of usable software out there now. If there are no > users, why have developers at all? you need developers before there can be users:-) i'm afraid i think we disagree on how useable the software is. Imo the really good software only covers some niches at present. I'm hesitant to go into details as that is a v tricky area of discussion!:-) > Besides, the LAD conference is > already aimed at developers. sure but surely thats in addition to and somewhat separate from any other organisation/event? > > > I dont see how corporate involvement will help here. > > I bet you've never booked a stand at a trade show. They are > fantastically expensive events to participate in. Without > sponsorship, it just wouldn't happen. Sure they're expensive. Dont fight the 'enemy' on their own ground. The introduction of large sums of money can change anything, and usually not for the better. We have better weapons. > > Should companies that have > > no interest in pro audio or music production be involved? > > If they have a fringe interest in audio, it could be in their > interest. What's good for pro audio - eg ALSA - may also be good for > more general use. However, I personally wanted to concentrate on > supporting software like JACK or Rosegarden, which is of little > interest to mainstream users. neither of those two projects is completed yet, although jack nearly is. Just out of interest, are you a Rosegarden user? I do think that Jack is terrific, but its a hard sell against competing systems where the wiring is almost a behind the scenes feature of a highly polished user app. Jack is not enough. Yes the 'infrastructure' is pretty much there. Now its time to finish building on it. I'm afraid my experiments with Rosegarden were not encouraging. This is partly because it uses a model which i dont personally favour, but perhaps its time for me to give it another try... > > > For such an organisation to have respect from > > outside, it needs to be seen as representative. And to a large > > degree your consortium already is, having most of the major players > > as members. Therefore it speaks for me whether i want it to or not. > > I don't quite follow that. I'm not out to exclude anybody. my point was that if the organisation is succesful then i will have to become a member if i want to have any infuence. If i disagree with the aims of the organisation and dont become a member then i will be excluded from many discussions and decisions that i perhaps have important opinions about. That is not neccesarily a bad thing, but i just want to see it done in the best possible way. > > > unless you think it through some more and seriously > > acknowledge that your actions are underiming the egalitarian nature > > of the community and have the potential to split it > > That's a pretty serious charge. a bit melodramatic perhaps:-) I just wanted to point out the potential negative effects that you had perhaps overlooked in your enthusiasm. > > I believe there's a limited window of opportunity for Linux on the > desktop in general, and audio/music applications are just a tiny part > of that. Pro applications are an even smaller niche. I think there's > a serious risk that without some organised advocacy aimed at building > a significant user base, libre software in this area will eventually > wither away. I don't want to see that. i dont beleive there is a limited window. The effects of the GPL are only just beginning! It cant be stopped. Even if it coexists with proprietory systems, i am convinced that the successor to Linux will still be here in 20 years, and Jamin will be the default software in mastering houses worldwide. This will happen not because of promotion but because it is better. Too many people have seen the good life and cannot go back to proprietory software. i am reminded of the excellent Coen Bros film The Man Who Wasnt There. He had a good thing going but ruined it by being greedy. Of course you can find many more films with the opposite moral:-) anyway, the think the important isssues here are: 1-which companies are you courting and why? 2-is it yet the right time for promotion? Does the software really compete with proprietory products enough to justify major expenditure? (btw this is taking up way too much of my time today, so i'll probably have to go completely offline tomorrow:-)) thanks for listening:-) -- Tim Orford

21 years, 2 months

[linux-audio-dev] [ANN] GNUsound 0.6.2 released

by Pascal Haakmat

Hi, GNUsound 0.6.2 was released. Changes from 0.6.1: Fixed bug where mute/solo buttons weren't correctly being selected when tracks were vertically scrolled. Added mouse wheel support, mouse wheel now controls zoom. Download at the usual place: http://awacs.dhs.org/software/gnusound Thanks, Pascal.

21 years, 2 months

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Linux-audio-dev January 2004