[Fwd: Re: looking for command-line/scriptable mastering software] - Linux-audio-user

25 Nov 2012

-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Ralf Mardorf &lt;ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com&gt;
To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: Re: [LAU] looking for command-line/scriptable mastering
software
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:40:52 +0100

On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 12:05 -0800, J. Liles wrote:
...
  On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Grekim
&lt;grekimj(a)acousticrefuge.com&gt;
 wrote:

 [snip]

         It's too bad the closed source issue has rubbed you guys the
         wrong way.  The way I see it, I've invested well over 1000
         hours and a year of work on something which I ask nothing for
         in return except maybe a little respect now and then :)  

 You're not likely to get any respect from this community unless/until
 you release your source code under a free/libre license. Who have
 spent decades and 10's of thousands of hours working on projects that
 we give away freely and openly, your software is irrelevant and your
 request for respect is borderline insulting. If you're truly proud of
 what you've created, then show it to the world. You're not getting the
 feedback you want because no one wants to run your mysterious binary
 blob, and I don't blame them. You're never going to strike it rich
 with this software, so the only legitimate reason you could possibly
 have for not sharing the source code is that you're ashamed of what a
 mess it is. 
It's stupid not to share knowledge. Secret recipes are from another
time. If people don't want to share their knowledge, e.g. good or bad
code, it's ok, valuation is stupid too.

Close source code for a open source community is absurd, OTOH the open
source community tends to be dogmatic and to evaluate others often by
exaggerated opinions of them self and prejudices.

AFAIK the community does like LinuxDSP and AFAIK they give away binary
blobs only, I might be mistaken.

It has a lot to do with aversion and devotion. Two people can say the
same, or by a misunderstanding somebody does think person A said
something, but person B said it. The rating isn't neutral, but
sentimental.

Respect has to do with group behaviour only, not with knowledge or
something like that. It's simple dogmatism, nothing more. Such noise is
typical for some Linux lists.