On 03/30/2012 10:27 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 05:14:50PM -0400, Thomas
Vecchione wrote:
Personally I prefer Ardour's behavior myself.
I do keep my samples on an
external drive, but in the end the ability to maintain a self-contained
session for portability purposes is important to me.
You always have that ability, even if you allow others not
to use it. And if you don't allow that, as Ardour does when
by chance it can, it's no longer an 'ability' but something
forced onto you.
On 03/30/2012 10:14 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
Personally I prefer Ardour's behavior myself. I
do keep my samples on
an external drive, but in the end the ability to maintain a
self-contained session for portability purposes is important to me. But
to each their own.
aha. this discussion may still be in flux and i believe it's all about
session management and not whether each application native behavior is
wrong or right. aham ;)
but ntl. let me see,
ardour stores a world under its own session directory on a per session
basis. you may call it that way or project, song, collection, whatever
is more appropriate. check.
otoh, qtractor doesn't do that but you (the human being) are in control,
remenber? it's your choice anyway. and there's an exit option: you may
chose anytime to save the whole (qtractor) session in a zip file
container. in case you don't know, this is a pretty regular zip file
(besides having an esquisite .qtz file suffix), just like
(open|libre)office and .jar files are and, as far as my knowledge goes,
are pretty portable stuff ;)
again, the subject at hand is about session management and whether huge
or small "external" files are to get reported to the SM from
applications in its way to collect, map(*) and possibly massage--my
nomenclature here--a managed-session-"repertoire".
(*) map: hashes, symlinks, hardlinks or whatever--it's a SM
implementation detail anyhow
otherwise, i may be way off base (which is not that rare:^))
cheers
--
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc(a)rncbc.org