Linux-audio-user December 2006

linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

161 participants
166 discussions

RE: [linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen

>> As long as there is no solution to combine not registering and >> registering, there will at least be two wikis'. > >Well, so be it. Please correct me if I am wrong, but so far I know for >sure >that this particular thing bothers only you, and I've not gotten a clear >answer whether you would be willing to put in time to maintain such a >potential spamfest of a Wiki. Hence, on behalf of linuxaudio.org I am >inclined to make an offer to the Linux audio community that favors >majority >(again, please correct me if I am wrong). Why not use one of those generated pictures things? >We simply must understand that as long as we propose fragmentation of the >humble Linux audio scene because of our hard-line stands/preferences >(most >of whose impact is superficial at best while creating an unreasonable >amount >of overhead), we will be spending immense amounts of time and effort >reinventing the wheel. This fact alone should make any sane person cry >from >frustration. Well, I'll use linuxaudio.org, no matter what you do. But I don't understand the need for registration. If spam takes over, well, then it can be introduced later.

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Renick Bell

>> And the question then is, will wikipedia allow us to create all >> these sub-categories? (linux-audio-Demos, linux-audio-digital-dj, and so >> on.) I am not an experienced Wikipedia contributor, but it seems that they are generally fine with it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold "It is usually worth proposing any changes to categories and/or templates on talk or other relevant WikiProject pages prior to making any change." The general guidelines for creating categories and subcategories are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization#How_to_create_categor… > I'd say that wikipedia should be used as a summary page, rather than an > exhaustive resource with app-specific documentation. So, I guess in that > respect I do agree with your ideas. However, I do not see it as an > exhaustive documentation resource for every app. I think that is what the Wikipedia policies also have in mind. I thought that the point, from the subject, was attracting more developers (and non-Linux users, especially). For that purpose, Wikipedia is probably a much better starting point than a more Linux-centric site. As for the specific documentation, my suggestion is to limit the number of wikis. One is really better than three. It means less maintenance work for the maintainers (and thanks to those who decide to do it). It will be much easier for a community of this limited size to clean up the vandalism of spammers or correct mistakes than dividing our efforts among three locations. Maybe most importantly, if I have a question, I don't have to go to three different places to look for the information. Similarly, if I have documentation to contribute, I don't have to go three places to add it. -- Renick Bell http://www.the3rd2nd.com

19 years, 1 month

Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen

Esben Stien: > >> we agree? > >No;). > >As long as there is no solution to combine not registering and >registering, there will at least be two wikis'. Yes, I think so too. Registering is too much work. What happens when I must register to something, I completely forget what I was doing while waiting for the confirmation mail.

19 years, 1 month

Re: [linux-audio-user] [ANN] yet another linux sound wiki.

by Mathias Friman

Marc-Olivier Barre wrote: >> > open for editing to all registered users >> >> How is the one we already have, not perfect? > It's nice, but it will need to evolve, since software also evolves. I don't know if it is just me, but isn't a wiki the worst case scenario for this site? It is a link collection, and most, if not all, of the software in the links already have websites of their own to some extent. A wiki, and this one seems to be no exception, lacks a clear navigational structure, or at least overview. The basic questions that need to be answered are: 1. Where am I? 2. Where can I go? 3. How can I get back? and in a wiki those questions are harder to answer than in a regular menudriven website. And first and foremost, most wikis are fairly ugly. ;) The aspect of community driven content however, is something that I stand behind, but some smaller projects that I have been involved in have not benefited from it. I'm of the opinion that some sort of form to fill in would suffice for the information necessary, and then a number of volunteers to format that information. And so there is no question about my bias: Yes, I have already sketched on such a website and made a first layout using the original content from linux-sound.org. But that is not the point I'm trying to make, I'm glad to have done this in vain if only the final result is better. :) Some good information may be found at http://www.useit.com/papers/webwriting/ if you are interested about writing for the web. Highest regard, Mathias

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Sombody had to do it

by Folderol

... but why did it have to be me? :) It's that time of year isn't it? So that's my excuse. This is a slightly different arrangement of a well known melody. http://www.musically.me.uk/music/Silent_Night.ogg -- Will J G

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Mathias Friman

It's really a simple question: What is most important? 1. Good documentation, or 2. freely editable documentation? I do think that it is possible to have good documentation even if it is not freely editable. Contributions can be made in more ways than wikifying the content. And if the content is wikified and contributing is only possible through registration, only those that are motivated enough goes through the process of being authenticated. Also, all the worlds problems cannot be solved with a wiki. There are countless examples where a wiki is not the answer, and there are countless examples where a wiki is the only answer. When you have a hammer, everything is a nail. For contemplation: http://www.bbspot.com/News/2003/09/net_well.html Regards, Mathias

19 years, 1 month

Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Mathias Friman

Hannu Savolainen wrote: > About the original subject: IMHO the only way to attract more Linux > audio developers is paying for the software. Money is the reason why 90% > of people do any work. Practically all professional audio software > developers do they work for Win/Mac because the _paying_ customers use > them. Linux audio software is being developed by amateurs because there > is no market for professional developers. I don't think that the professional developers that code for Linux on their spare time agrees with you on that subject. :) Or all the people employed by Novell, RedHat, Ubuntu etc. Money is not the sole motivator, and it does not guarantee quality. There is no lack of good programs for linux audio production, what it lacks is documentation and an overall picture. If there existed a one-mouseclick-install Linux audio solution that ran VST-synths, had a latency of below 2 msec and with an abundance of documentation and user following, there would be no discussion. I personally think that it is the amount of study-time and steep learning curve that deters the people from adopting Linux. And since linux audio has got such a narrow spectrum and few followers, there is noone close at hand to ask questions. This list is a perfect example. If I had the same amount of knowledge available from swedish speaking people, I wouldn't bother much with this list. :) International relations is all well and good, but as most people I prefer to use my native tongue. Kiitos (or something), Mathias

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Kjetil S. Matheussen

Esben Stien: > >> Why not just use Wikipedia as the main wiki? > > It's an excellent idea and I've mentioned it before;). I'd like to > hear the the views of the person who created the new audio wiki and > some comment from Hans Fugal. > > Is it possible to agree on this?, then have Ivica point to the > starting page of it on his site. > > Do we really need three wikis' when there is no conflicting view? > No, the idea is very good. However, it should be of the same quality as Dave's page. And therefore, we need all the categories he has. (list below). Because I think the first thing to do would be to copy all the contents from Dave's page into wikipedia. And the question then is, will wikipedia allow us to create all these sub-categories? (linux-audio-Demos, linux-audio-digital-dj, and so on.) Audio Plugins CD Software Csound & Cmix Helpers Demos Digital DJ Documentation/Newsworthy Drumming DSP Software Emulators Effects Processors File Compression File Conversion Games & Game Software Guitar Software Hardware + Linux JACK Linux Audio Bundles & Distributions Linux Music On-line Looping Software Mailing Lists MIDI Software Mixers MOD Trackers/Players/Resources MPEG (MP3) Players/Encoders Multitrack Recorders/Mixers Music Notation Musicians Utilities Network Audio OggVorbis Software Other Sound+MIDI Pages Other UNIX Audio and MIDI Software Players & Recorders Radio Repositories & Lists Scopes Software Synthesis & Music Composition Software Tools Sound Cards & Drivers Soundfile Editors Sounds For Free Speech Synthesis/Analysis Telephony/AV Conferencing Wikis

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Software suitable for children

by Bengt Gördén

Hi, One of my colleges asked me about Linux audio software suitable for children. I must admit that I never thought of that. Although I have children of my own. My children play with our small studio and if theres a problem I'm there anyway. But my college needs software that is more geared towards ease of use and in his case towards children (not that fluent in English) in the age of 6-7 years. So if you have any suggestion it would be appreciated. regards, /bengan

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Attracting more Linux audio developers

by Kjetil S. Matheussen

"Ivica Ico Bukvic": >> No, the idea is very good. However, it should be of the same >> quality as Dave's page. And therefore, we need all the categories >> he has. (list below). Because I think the first thing to do would be to >> copy all the contents from Dave's page into wikipedia. >> >> And the question then is, will wikipedia allow us to create all >> these sub-categories? (linux-audio-Demos, linux-audio-digital-dj, and so >> on.) > > I'd say that wikipedia should be used as a summary page, rather than an > exhaustive resource with app-specific documentation. So, I guess in that > respect I do agree with your ideas. However, I do not see it as an > exhaustive documentation resource for every app. > > Another observation is that while most of the apps have decent documentation > on their homepages, none of it is standardized in terms of > layout/cross-referencing/etc. and therefore an easy read. This is where our > documentation page could shine providing a streamlined/standardized > resource. More so, if we generate such a resource, I am convinced that a > quorum of Linux audio users who may not be able to contribute code, may be > more willing to donate their time in maintaining/contributing to the > documentation project, especially if the format for such contributions is > demystified with appropriate templates. Ultimately, this would also help > project developers not worry as much about the documentation, so it would be > a win-win situation for all. Heck, in due time, we may even attract some > financial support from various commercial distros in order to maintain this > distro-agnostic resource. > This sounds like an extremely good good idea. Speaking for myself, I very seldom bother to make homepages for all of my software, but if there had been a system (preferably some kind of wiki), it wouldn't be much hassle to create them. > For the aforesaid reasons, I feel that a wikipedia page in conjunction to > project's homepages is IMHO not enough. That is not to say that we shouldn't > have one, but I simply see it as a summary resource which leads user towards > the real documentation site. > Yes.

19 years, 1 month

← Newer
1
...
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
...
17
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

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-user December 2006