Hi Louigi! You're definitely on the money but at the same time I'm sure you know the reasons behind your unhappiness with LA's glacial progress. No good bug reports = No free software community. Its as vital as people writing and using the actual code. All non-trivial software is buggy. Even the simpler stuff has bugs, just maybe no-ones found them yet. As you are well aware, software developed by volunteers in their spare is obviously likely to have a few more but research has shown that over time FLOSS software can become more stable and secure than non-FLOSS. Due to this fact, when I go using FLOSS, I expect to and and feel it is my duty to report bugs much more so than for something I have paid a decent amount of money for. If I know they are making a living out of their software, I'm much less forgiving. So the choice becomes this, you can either forget about FLOSS music making and just get down to it with known working, maybe non-free software or attempt FLOSS music making but expect to spend time reporting bugs. I agree that making music with Linux is still problematic and some way off competing with the non-free platforms in many respects but Linux is in many ways a superior OS and you know as well as I do the slow but steady improvement that is happening here and just how cool it will all likely be in a few years time when we have even less to moan about. That's why we persist, isn't it? On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona(a)gmail.comwrote: here: http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=… You most certainly have a point: thanks for bringing this up for discussion. I'll introduce a few concepts I feel are relevant to this discussion: 1. Developer time is best spent developing, not doing testing. 2. As a developer I know how that a lot of time goes into testing. 3. If testing is not done, the software suffers. 4. The developer will test their uses for the software while writing it. My background is writing Luppp, a live performance software. I've had it crash before getting on stage to do a performance, I now know the "users-perspective" of a crash: it simply is not acceptable. That said, I cannot possibly test every hardware control surface, every effect plugin etc with it. How can the testing be performed to a good standard? One idea that comes to mind is a group of "testing-buddies". Basically, I'll spend 5 minutes doing bug-reports for you, if you do the same for me. Since each tester will try to accomplish different things (and on a different system etc), perhaps this could help? A downside to this idea is that essentially developers test for each other: in the end of the day developer time is spent testing. I'm open to suggestions, criticism etc :) -Harry

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote: Wow. OK. Well, let me say a few things from the other perspective. The point you keep repeating is that youre 'tired of filing bug reports'. Well, how do you think a developer who spends decades of their lives making something and giving it away for free, when 90% of the feedback they get is in the form of complaining? Don't you imagine that that would become far more tiresome than filling out a bug report every couple of months? If you consider the time that the developer of the software your using has spent in order to give it to you FOR FREE, and OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF THEIR HEARTS--years or decades of their nights and weekends, how does that compare to the few minutes it takes you to file a report? I say this to put your grievances in perspective--because it's quite clear that you really have no idea how petty it sounds to someone who is not currently as enraged with frustration as you are. Now, let's talk about that frustration. I know it well. In fact, anyone who uses software at all knows it well. You single out free software and linux audio, but believe me, the bugs are by now means limited to that domain. People are simply more forgiving of things they know they have no hope of affecting the outcome of (i.e. proprietary software). They live with the faults and limitations. It's a psychological phenomenon similar to the fact that you would take good care of a car that you had to save up for for years vs one that your parents just gave you for free. It's an unfortunate fact, because it distorts the reality. The reality is that free software in general has fewer limitations and a much faster response time to issues than proprietary software. Hell, when you send that bug report to a free software project, it's likely to be answered BY THE INVENTOR, and IMMEDIATELY. Do you think OS X users get their problems solved personally by Steve Jobs? Anyway, back to that frustration. It's very frustrating when a bug prevents you from making progress. It's infuriating when a bug causes you to lose work. I get it. In fact, this is pretty much the reason that I started my own Linux Audio projects in the first place--I couldn't find anything else reliable enough and was sick of having my project files trashed. When you submit a bug report, you're certainly helping--but you're helping other users and yourself. You're not helping the developer (if they hit the bug in their use of the software, they'd just fix it). Why would you give up helping yourself? Would you give up feeding yourself? Are you suicidal? Would you rather pay $700 for a DAW or whatever? Is it THAT frustrating to you? No? Just frustrating enough to diminish the work of people who helped you when you were down, who offered you the fruits of their labor out of the goodness of their hearts... Why don't you put that frustration to some positive use? Submit that bug report, or fix the damn thing yourself, or write your own. Or, god forbid, donate some damn money so that the developer in question can explain to their wive or girlfriend why they're sitting in front of the computer for 8 ours on yet another Saturday when they could be out enjoying the outdoors instead.

On 08/14/2013 04:00 AM, Louigi Verona wrote: Hey Louigi, I feel your frustration. I don't like it when things break, especially during a performance or recording. However, I'm not sure what you're want to accomplish by declaring that too much software is broken *and* that you're not going to take part in the fix-up process, at least not by making bug reports. But the plain fact remains that for *your* purposes it's true that there really is too much unfinished stuff out there. You come from a world where music software is packaged neat and ready to roll, and you are now trying to reach your musical goals in a world where no such packaging exists as a matter of course. Frankly, I probably wouldn't bother. I was initially attracted to Linux because of the software it ran well, and fortunately for me it suited my musical tendencies. Today, most of the software I use - Csound, Ardour, LADSPA, SuperCollider, etc - is well-established and well-maintained, with large and active development and user groups. You're using some of the latest things to evolve in the Linux audio world, e.g. synth plugins and pattern-based audio sequencers, most of which things have been in consistent development on Windows and/or the Mac for many years. Unfortunately for you and other musicians working in your artistic domains attention in Linux audio has been paid to other directions. I do see things improving in your direction, but only by fits and starts, hence the many unfinished/broken projects. Alas, beyond bug reports, I have no suggestions that will radically or readily improve the situation, though I do seriously advise using money - a.k.a. the universal solvent - as an incentive/motivator. Best, dp