[LMMS-devel] Wiki guys

1.1 is speeding towards us at warp 9, so we're going to need some documentation for all the new features. I do realize this is a lot to ask since we don't yet have all of 1.0 features documented either... How about if we try to gather up things that have been changed, post them here on the mailing

[LMMS-devel] 1.1 in less than a month?

https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues?direction=desc&milestone=2&page=1&sort=created&state=open I think many of these can be closed and moved to 1.2. -- View this message in context: http://linux-multimedia-studio-lmms.996328.n3.nabble.com/1-1-in-less-than-a-month-tp9092.html Sent from the lmms-

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

On 05/30/2014 09:46 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > > > No, not necessarily. Why would it? > > > > Only if we wanted to convert them to work in that way, which could > be done, but would require more backwards-compat code. > > Why would it? It just seems like the natural progression of things. >

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

> No, not necessarily. Why would it? > > Only if we wanted to convert them to work in that way, which could be done, but would require more backwards-compat code. Why would it? It just seems like the natural progression of things. Is this not what you had in mind for a dedicated tempo automation

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

On 05/30/2014 06:56 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Vesa > wrote: > > On 05/30/2014 06:28 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > > > Wouldn't increasing visibility by adding these to the song editor's > > view in effect inherently mak

Re: [LMMS-devel] api for creating plugins

On 05/30/2014 06:34 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > ... could we create a gui within lmms that taps into those features > and wont require coding > > Are you trying to describe a plugin builder? > > It would be quite cool to take a QML-like approach and have IDE-style > drag-and-drop plugin buildin

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Vesa wrote: > On 05/30/2014 06:28 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > > > Wouldn't increasing visibility by adding these to the song editor's > > view in effect inherently make the globals act and feel just like the > > non-globals since they'd be in track form? > >

Re: [LMMS-devel] api for creating plugins

> ... could we create a gui within lmms that taps into those features and wont require coding Are you trying to describe a plugin builder? It would be quite cool to take a QML-like approach and have IDE-style drag-and-drop plugin building using existing components but as a rule of thumb, whenever

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

On 05/30/2014 06:28 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > Wouldn't increasing visibility by adding these to the song editor's > view in effect inherently make the globals act and feel just like the > non-globals since they'd be in track form? Not quite. The global tracks always have a fixed single patte

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

> > However, personally I'd still prefer a dedicated tempo track. Global > auto tracks are a bit tricky because you can't use patterns in them, > they're just one long stretch of a pattern, which makes it a bit harder > to add automation at a specific point in the song (you have to look up > the po

Re: [LMMS-devel] 1.2 and models branch

You know, I'll just go and file it for master, as I don't think there's that much to gain from it in 1.1. We should probably just stick to the feature freeze anyway and work on stabilizing 1.1. And finishing the CSS features... those I think should still get into 1.1. At least I'd like to get full

Re: [LMMS-devel] 1.2 and models branch

On 05/30/2014 05:27 PM, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > Hi Vesa, > > 2014-05-30 16:11 GMT+02:00 Vesa : >> Hey, since we've now apparently separated 1.1 as its own branch, should >> I file the models (sample-exact) branch to be merged in master so as to >> get it ready for 1.2? Or are we still considering

Re: [LMMS-devel] Wiki revival

Done. 2014-05-30 16:37 GMT+02:00 Lukas W. : > Oh sorry, I should have known. I can't figure out how to make you an > admin, so I'll edit the CSS myself now. Give me a minute. > > > 2014-05-29 21:23 GMT+02:00 Stian Jørgensrud : > > I could have added the CSS, if I were an admin I can't edit t

Re: [LMMS-devel] Wiki revival

Oh sorry, I should have known. I can't figure out how to make you an admin, so I'll edit the CSS myself now. Give me a minute. 2014-05-29 21:23 GMT+02:00 Stian Jørgensrud : > I could have added the CSS, if I were an admin I can't edit that page. > > < > http://linux-multimedia-studio-lmms.99

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

On 05/30/2014 05:14 PM, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > It just came to my mind that we could think about re-using the global > automation pattern feature. If we change it that way that all global > automations (as soon as more than one value is set) appear as > individual tracks it improves visibility a

Re: [LMMS-devel] 1.2 and models branch

Hi Vesa, 2014-05-30 16:11 GMT+02:00 Vesa : > Hey, since we've now apparently separated 1.1 as its own branch, should > I file the models (sample-exact) branch to be merged in master so as to > get it ready for 1.2? Or are we still considering including it for 1.1...? Good question. I can't estima

Re: [LMMS-devel] Things learned while working on the sampletrack branch

Hi Vesa and others, thank you for your suggestions and discussion! It took me a while to read at least thouroughly over what has been written. I also vote for implementing a dedicated tempo track. The current approach simply "was there" after implementing automation support at all -> basic tempo c

[LMMS-devel] 1.2 and models branch

Hey, since we've now apparently separated 1.1 as its own branch, should I file the models (sample-exact) branch to be merged in master so as to get it ready for 1.2? Or are we still considering including it for 1.1...? -

Re: [LMMS-devel] api for creating plugins

If a developers create the code for an instrument plugin which can do anything... why don't he just release it as a plugin instead of letting the user turn all the functions on and off with code? I have never understood this idea. The developer would have to create all code, and then the user could

Re: [LMMS-devel] api for creating plugins

On 05/30/2014 10:21 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > On that note another crazy idea comes to the surface. could we create > a gui within lmms that taps into those features and wont require > coding for any non coders out there? A gui that does what exactly? --

Re: [LMMS-devel] api for creating plugins

On that note another crazy idea comes to the surface. could we create a gui within lmms that taps into those features and wont require coding for any non coders out there? On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Vesa wrote: > On 05/30/2014 09:44 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > > Hey guys this email is

Re: [LMMS-devel] api for creating plugins

On 05/30/2014 09:44 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > Hey guys this email is just to get some thoughts on the above. I think > we should create an api or if one exists for plugins documenting what > potentially the end user can create with some time and patience and a > bit of learning how to code? W