On 2010-10-31 19:36, Scott Lavender wrote: > > > @David Henningsson > > We should keep audacity. You might be able to use ardour for mastering > as well, but IIRC ardour is trickier to set up (jack etc) whereas > audacity can run on anything. And, as pointed out by another user, it > seems to be needed in a workflow already. > > > I may have a differing view on this. > > What purpose will Audacity serve? > > If one is using Audacity to record music without JACK, then perhaps > downloading 1.7 gigs and installing Ubuntu Studio is overkill and not > our target audience. I would suggest this audience is better served > by using vanilla Ubuntu and installing Audacity manually. > > By contrast, I would expect the typical Ubuntu Studio user to use JACK > and Ardour for audio. This is just my opinion mind you. > > I had actually put Audacity in the workflows, but under the Graphics > section, which would be installed when the user selects the "[ ] > Graphics" box during installation. This would be used to make simple > edits to audio to be used with creating videos. > > But if you have a desired place for Audacity in the audio toolchain, > please add it to the wiki :) > > ScottL Okay, I have added Audacity to the list of workflows. However, if you feel like that workflow is not a typical "ubuntu studio user" workflow, feel free to remove it. I admit to not having followed the "who are we targetting" discussion closely.
// David -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
