Sounds like a good plan to me! I remember having a hard time getting lmms updated in Debian, mainly due to the old copy of calf-plugins being split out into a separate package. But it is really meant to be a complete, integrated audio solution with no need to install anything else. Which is really what our seeds are trying to achieve anyway.
Way back, we were trying to get some "workflows" documented in the wiki for the different seeds. We did not get much input on publishing. This change will probably mean matching changes in the installer graphics and project website. On 9/30/21 7:19 PM, Erich Eickmeyer wrote: > Hi all, > > We hit a limit. Apparently, between Sunday the 26th and Monday the 27th, the > squashfs hit the technical limit of 4.0GB on our ISO image. Per ISO 9660, > this > is a hard limit as the file system is incapable of having a single file more > than 4GB in size (the squashfs acts as a single file on the root of the ISO). > Unfortunately, this means we need to take a hard look at what we preinstall > by > default and start eliminating some items. > > As an emergency, I went ahead and removed a few duplicate items and one > fairly > large item, but it opened my eyes to a bigger picture issue. More on that > later. > > In terms of deduplicating functionality, I removed jackd (not jackd2) since > you can only have one anyhow. Also, I removed lmms which, in mine and Len's > opinion, is an application that is stuck in the past using the older ladpsa > (LV1) plugins and refuses to get any update. This is in favor of Ardour as > our > DAW of choice. > > Other items: > > * Switched from ksysguard to the new plasma-systemmonitor for the desktop > * Removed raysession in favor of agordejo and new-session-manager combined, > which provides the same functionality with more backend support. > * Removed simple-scan in favor of skanlite (a KDE scanner app) > > However, this is just a bandaid. > > My proposal is that we drop publishing as a category of apps that we install > beginning with 22.04. My reasoning is that we're not very well-known for > being > a desktop publishing platform, and it blurs the line between "studio" and > general-purpose. Moreover, people doing desktop publishing aren't exactly > looking at Ubuntu Studio as we rarely see any questions about it. In fact, > when people are reviewing Studio, they're a little surprised and perplexed to > see such tools. > > Len pointed out that while we could remove the publishing items, he feared > that items in the graphics category would get removed. I assured him that > this is not the case; that while there's some overlap, removing the > publishing > meta would not remove any graphics items since the graphics meta still pullse > those items in. > > Removing the publishing meta would remove the following from the ISO: > > * scribus > * calibre > * pdfshuffler > * plume-creator > > I know this doesn't sound like much, but I think it would be good to save > some > space and no longer support desktop publishing as a category of items we > install by default. > > Let me know what you think. > Erich > > -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
