On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 5:24 PM Filipe Coelho <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 04/01/21 00:55, John Rigg wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 03, 2021 at 11:25:16PM +0000, Filipe Coelho wrote:
> >> jackpatch has a user-experience problem
> > Out of curiosity, what is the problem? I've been using it
> > for over 6 years and it's always worked flawlessly here.
> It is not a problem you see all the time, but when it happens is annoying.
>
> There is a whole thread going on about this, so I will keep that
> discussion there.
>
>
> >> An export/import option is not unreasonable, in my opinion (and several
> >> others on the same github topic too).
> > There is an 'import at mouse' option in each track menu.
> >
> > Unlike Ardour, non-timeline records multichannel tracks to multichannel
> > files, which can be used as is, so no need for a separate export
> function.
> >
> > If further conversion is required it can be done with an existing program
> > like sox.
>
> There is a misunderstanding here. This is about NSM.
>
> So the idea is to have a way to export a session from the GUI, so that
> we do not have to manually find the right dir and manually compress
> using tar or similar.
> This is error-prone due to requiring correct use of tar. If symlinks are
> used in the session, we likely want to convert those into real files.
>
> Having such option in a GUI prevents user error, as the right tar
> commands or anything custom needed will be there.
> Same for import, kinda.
>
> There was a ticket about this, with then some discussion on how/why this
> is stupid and dumbing-down users.
>
> Personally I still think this would be of great value.
> I sometimes forget the right flag to make 'tar' resolve symlinks when
> creating a tarball.
>
>
That's why a clever person puts that kind of thing in a shell script and
just invokes the script rather than trying to remember the right commands.

I was perfectly happy and willing to discuss the issue of archives and
imports with you. *You* were unwilling to consider the possibility that A)
it needn't be built into NSM and B) that I needn't do it myself.

Still happy to discuss it, of course. But bear in mind, that I am
interested in the best solution, putting things where they belong, and
keeping the complexity and bloat to a minimum. So if you come into the
discussion with fixed views about who should do what or where it belongs,
then you're probably going to be frustrated when better ideas are presented.

Reply via email to