Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Roadmap, quick sketch: ( Not in chronological order ) - Per track automation (done, mostly) - Pattern overlap prevention (mostly done, some bugs left) - Tempo track (in progress) - Song playback parallelization & redesign (in progress, halfway done) - ProcessHandles for tracks (done) - Control

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/27/2014 11:52 AM, Raine M. Ekman wrote: > Cool, but... where's the roadmap you were going to write? I'll get to that when I get to that... I haven't forgotten about it, don't worry. -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - Th

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Quoting Vesa : > Making more progress with tempo track... > > > Soon, proper sampletrack playback from any position should be a > possibility. Cool, but... where's the roadmap you were going to write? Not that this circus turning into a one man show necessarily is bad, but if that is to be avo

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/26/2014 10:21 PM, DeRobyJ wrote: > Hurray! > What about Mixer channel support for sample tracks? Oh, that's a really simple thing. Trivial even. Just hasn't been much point to implement it before since sampletracks have been so broken anyway... ---

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Hurray! What about Mixer channel support for sample tracks? Il 26/11/2014 20:35, Vesa ha scritto: Soon, proper sampletrack playback from any position should be a possibility. -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Making more progress with tempo track... Soon, proper sampletrack playback from any position should be a possibility. -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Superch

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/26/2014 08:19 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > Since you're pretty deep into the 2.0 rewrite, we'll need someone else > to look at the dual-filter plugin to move 1.1. along. I'll take a > look now. > Just a hunch, but try adding updateFilters() at the end of the loadSettings() function... -

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

> > > > Thanks for the update, @Vesa. A picture is 1,000 words. Since you're pretty deep into the 2.0 rewrite, we'll need someone else to look at the dual-filter plugin to move 1.1. along. I'll take a look now. -Tres --

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/26/2014 04:51 PM, Vesa wrote: > Tempo track. > > Not functional yet but the UI is there... I now also have pattern overlap prevention working. -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Tempo track. Not functional yet but the UI is there... -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sh

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Heheh, Comic Sans... Many planning to get dirty with coding, Jonathan, you know some python right? Anyway, there's something to do even if you can't code, the hard part is to devote time. -- View this message in context: http://linux-multimedia-studio-lmms.996328.n3.nabble.com/Moving-on-tp108

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

> > can go start an angry blog written entirely in comic sans. I'm terribly sorry for taking the bait here... I'm not normally one to troll (image attached) -- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Se

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 05:01 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > If I have a say, it it will stay LMMS. We own lmms.io > , have an official youtube channel, an official > soundcloud group, official facebook page. > > Yesterday, our site received about 2,400 visitors and if the pattern > continues

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

> > I really want to get my hands dirty with programming I'd argue most of our community would rather be making music, but we all make personal sacrifices for the greater good. It's part of the culture. :) -Tres -- Down

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

I really want to get my hands dirty with programming On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Vesa wrote: > On 11/19/2014 04:52 PM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > > I am actually planning on contributing but with my very limited c/c++ > > know how not sure where a good task would be to start. > > You could

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

If I have a say, it it will stay LMMS. We own lmms.io, have an official youtube channel, an official soundcloud group, official facebook page. Yesterday, our site received about 2,400 visitors and if the pattern continues, it is likely to grow over time if we keep releasing updates and better way

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 04:52 PM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > I am actually planning on contributing but with my very limited c/c++ > know how not sure where a good task would be to start. You could run the fundraising for hiring a developer -project. All you'd need to do is accept the legal responsibility o

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

diiz wrote > think LMMS 2.x >> needs to be called something other than LMMS > > Again? Welp, time for another round of bikeshedding... :D *sigh* not ..again oki /Leisure music making studio/ == LMMS New meets old, Kisses are exchanged, and nothing is changed hooray -- View this message in

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

I am actually planning on contributing but with my very limited c/c++ know how not sure where a good task would be to start. On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Lukas W. wrote: > Here's some probably even crazier food for thought. If you have ideas that > good… Why don't you actually do some of the

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Here's some probably even crazier food for thought. If you have ideas that good… Why don't you actually do some of the things you keep talking about, or just shut up? That 'or' is not exclusive. 2014-11-19 14:58 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Aquilina : > Here is some probably crazy food for though. If there

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Technically couldnt copy the code from the other projects? On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:10 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 'Cos someone would have to sit down and write the exporters. > > (We still don't even have a direct MIDI export.) > > On 19 November 2014 13:58, Jonathan Aquilina > wrote: > > Here

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

'Cos someone would have to sit down and write the exporters. (We still don't even have a direct MIDI export.) On 19 November 2014 13:58, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > Here is some probably crazy food for though. If there is potential for mmp > and mmpz being dropped. Why dont we allow users to expo

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Here is some probably crazy food for though. If there is potential for mmp and mmpz being dropped. Why dont we allow users to export in other formats the other open source DAWS use such as hydrogen rosegarden etc? On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Tres Finocchiaro < tres.finocchi...@gmail.com> wrot

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

> > > why not if an old project is opened lmms2 that it upgrades the mmp with > data that it speaks and understand? That is EXACTLY what we are talking about. Vesa is removing old compat code (for good reason). We'll have an equivalent of it back in. We'll see where the 2.0 branch ends up thou

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Stian and Tres both show and mention versioning. I dont know if it is as simple as this, but why not if an old project is opened lmms2 that it upgrades the mmp with data that it speaks and understand? Or would a converter of some sort be better here. On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Tres Finocchia

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 01:02 PM, Spekular R wrote: > > Vesa, how have you gone about finding compatibility hacks? Have you > searched something like "if (version <..." or have you manually gone > through files looking for that them? Do any compatibility hacks exist > that don't rely on checking for old vers

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

> > > How can you even check version on a project? https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/blob/master/src/core/project_version.cpp Or https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/blob/master/src/core/DataFile.cpp#L328 Etc. - tres.finocchi...@gmail.com On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Stian Jørgensrud wrote: > How

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

How can you even check version on a project? Spekular R wrote > Vesa, how have you gone about finding compatibility hacks? Have you > searched something like "if (version <..." or have you manually gone > through files looking for that them? Do any compatibility hacks exist that > don't rely on c

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Vesa, how have you gone about finding compatibility hacks? Have you searched something like "if (version <..." or have you manually gone through files looking for that them? Do any compatibility hacks exist that don't rely on checking for old versions, and thus wouldn't be found by a search? --

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 19 November 2014 04:27, Vesa wrote: > If we're going to add any compat code for 1.x projects, that should be > done as an import plugin. That way we can confine any legacy code into a > neat little box that doesn't clutter the rest of the codebase. Yes, that's reasonable. It could even get

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

You mention breaking backwards compatability. Cant we provide the end users with some sort of conversion utility? On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Vesa wrote: > On 11/18/2014 08:07 PM, David Gerard wrote: > > Right ... so if I want to move from 1.x to 2.0, what do I need to do > > with my files

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 06:21 AM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > > > Perhaps it could be held as a carrot for enticing people to donate for > > the paid developer project... You know, as a perk? Stretch goal? Would > > that be a reasonable thing to do? > > Yes completely agreed. We will need help scabbing comp

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

> Perhaps it could be held as a carrot for enticing people to donate for > the paid developer project... You know, as a perk? Stretch goal? Would > that be a reasonable thing to do? Yes completely agreed. We will need help scabbing compat code back in. It is a painful process and when lead from

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 03:56 AM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > When we originally discussed this idea, we set forth a few > principals. We never voted on them, but I stated that if backwards > compatibly were broken, we would absolutely need to maintain the MIDI > data. Like I said, as long as we're talking a

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

When we originally discussed this idea, we set forth a few principals. We never voted on them, but I stated that if backwards compatibly were broken, we would absolutely need to maintain the MIDI data. If this principal changes, we will be hard pressed to get buy in from the masses. We should ce

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Rob Kudla wrote > At a minimum, it should import the tracks' note events as though they're > coming from a standard MIDI file, perhaps with an idiot dialog that says > "Here's the notes, but now you're on your own". Most people on this list, > myself included, could write something that lazy in an

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Ok, so as far as providing backwards compat as a 3rd-party option... I think the actual note data (as it is saved in the project files) is not going to change much if at all - that's one area where we don't really need to do any drastic changes. This means that it should be perfectly possible for

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 12:29 AM, David Gerard wrote: > But I do want to note: for us users, it's about our music. Users don't > actually care about the software, they care what they can do with it. We're all users here. I don't think anyone here is just in it for the coding, pretty much everyone on this m

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 12:19 AM, Rob Kudla wrote: > On 11/18/2014 02:23 PM, Vesa wrote: >> Well, if you have old projects, you'll just have to finish them with 1.1 >> or 1.2 and render them to wavs. Then publish them, forget about it, and >> make new music with 2.0. > If this is the current development team

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 12:19 AM, Rob Kudla wrote: > On 11/18/2014 02:23 PM, Vesa wrote: >> Well, if you have old projects, you'll just have to finish them with 1.1 >> or 1.2 and render them to wavs. Then publish them, forget about it, and >> make new music with 2.0. > If this is the current development te

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/19/2014 12:29 AM, David Gerard wrote: > But I do want to note: for us users, it's about our music. Users don't > actually care about the software, they care what they can do with it. We're all users here. I don't think anyone here is just in it for the coding, pretty much everyone on this

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 18 November 2014 22:19, Rob Kudla wrote: > On 11/18/2014 02:23 PM, Vesa wrote: >> Well, if you have old projects, you'll just have to finish them with 1.1 >> or 1.2 and render them to wavs. Then publish them, forget about it, and >> make new music with 2.0. > If this is the current developmen

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 02:23 PM, Vesa wrote: > Well, if you have old projects, you'll just have to finish them with 1.1 > or 1.2 and render them to wavs. Then publish them, forget about it, and > make new music with 2.0. If this is the current development team's outlook, I really think LMMS 2.x needs to be

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 11:44 PM, David Gerard wrote: > Is there a written procedure to do this? Because there's an open bug > asking for straightforward MIDI export. I think there was a tutorial for it on the LMMS forums, I'm not sure. In any case should be pretty straightforward, you route MIDI out of LMM

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

The big reason(s) for not upgrading your LMMS version when working on a project is for the project not getting corrupt/bad/lost forever. I would strongly discourage anyone to upgrade LMMS versions when working on important songs. Many programs break backwardcompatibility at times when they have ex

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 18 November 2014 21:43, Vesa wrote: > Well, there are ways to export MIDI out of LMMS. You can route the MIDI > out from LMMS into some kind of MIDI sequencer, set it on record, and > then save the MIDI file. Then import the resulting MIDI files to 2.0. Is there a written procedure to do thi

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 11:42 PM, David Gerard wrote: > Yes. I'm afraid I'm now asking around friends for software that may be > proprietary, but has a track record of caring about backward > compatibility Well then -- Download BIR

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

I mean, the LMMS 1 userbase is trivial, and perhaps there's a much bigger one that LMMS 2 thinks it can net. On 18 November 2014 21:42, David Gerard wrote: > Yes. I'm afraid I'm now asking around friends for software that may be > proprietary, but has a track record of caring about backward > com

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 11:28 PM, I'm Umcaruje wrote: > What I am very sad about is that I won't be able to open my songs in > 2.0. No matter how broken, I would really like to be able to just get > the MIDI data out of my previous projects, because I don't want to > flush all my ideas and melodies down the

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Yes. I'm afraid I'm now asking around friends for software that may be proprietary, but has a track record of caring about backward compatibility - since LMMS 1 doesn't have export for data [*] and I'm going to have to reprogram everything anyway. [*] It's XML, I could write some XSLT! To get eve

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

What I am very sad about is that I won't be able to open my songs in 2.0. No matter how broken, I would really like to be able to just get the MIDI data out of my previous projects, because I don't want to flush all my ideas and melodies down the toilet if I want to use LMMS 2.0. -Uroš|Umcaruje O

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Status update: per-track automation is working now, mostly. I can now connect a track with ctrl-dragging a knob to it, and from then on, add more patterns to the track with a click of the mouse, without having to drag the knob again every time. Convenient and fun. Currently not much is working i

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 09:17 PM, David Gerard wrote: > Um ... so from the user viewpoint, LMMS 2 will be a completely > different project from LMMS 1? Yes. Old presets may still work (no promises though, but I expect most of them will). > (I'm not questioning your rationale, but I *am* thinking in terms o

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Um ... so from the user viewpoint, LMMS 2 will be a completely different project from LMMS 1? (I'm not questioning your rationale, but I *am* thinking in terms of how to get my music out.) On 18 November 2014 18:38, Vesa wrote: > On 11/18/2014 08:07 PM, David Gerard wrote: >> Right ... so if I w

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 08:07 PM, David Gerard wrote: > Right ... so if I want to move from 1.x to 2.0, what do I need to do > with my files You won't. It's not possible. There will be no backwards compatibility between 2.0 and earlier versions. It'll be a complete break in compat. All projects made in pre-

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

On 11/18/2014 05:19 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > Sounds good. We'll need to do a full second round of testing on > stable-1.1 prior to release due to the large amount of commits. I'd > really like to get that loop marker patch in before release too, but > it is unlikely as there are pre-existing

Re: [LMMS-devel] Moving on...

Sounds good. We'll need to do a full second round of testing on stable-1.1 prior to release due to the large amount of commits. I'd really like to get that loop marker patch in before release too, but it is unlikely as there are pre-existing bugs with the interface that I am unable to track down.

[LMMS-devel] Moving on...

So, I'm personally pretty happy with 1.1 now, I think as soon as we get the last commits to that Delay plugin, we can merge that and then call 1.1 done. Bugfixes only from then on. So I'm moving on to bigger things, I don't feel a need to work on 1.1 any further. I've also now merged the memmgr br