a little idea that might be wayyy too ignorant about the development style and resources, but it came to my mind:
Some time ago, there was a discussion about midi in Ardour, and some few people even rejected the implementation of midi because they don’t need it and feared new bugs.
Other people can’t wait for midi to be usable…
Now at some point, Ardour2 could become a “bugfix” only branch, where updates only fixes bugs and don’t implement any new features. I really like the updates coming along, but they always mix bug fixes with new features (that could include new bugs).
At the same point, Ardour3 could be released as a bit more unstable (still stable) but with much more up to date features.
This would mean real releases (not svn) of both Ardour 2 and 3 side by side where people could go with the ultra stable “old” Ardour2 or the cool midi Ardour3.
You are allowed to beat me for this idea, because it probably would consume more time and won’t be possible and maybe even unwise.
Even so, it’s my idea for Ardour that came to my mind under the shower
Ardour3 compiles in Ubuntu Gutsy/Hardy quite easily, you just need to install a bunch of dependencies with apt-get first. Because of this, I don’t see any reason for devs to waste time packaging a development branch when they could be developing. People who are itching to test it out can compile from source, and probably don’t mind doing so.
I just was an idea to smoothen the transition from Version 2 to 3 - to avoid the point where you either have to to switch to 3 to get any updates or stay with an never-again changing 2.
If I’m right, then Ardour3 will bring more than only midi - also the new export dialog, meta data, real support for multi-core cpus, etc. etc. With so much changes, maybe the whole thing will get a bit more unstable again. My idea was for the transition time.
Also: I thought that this could speed up the release of Version 3 if I’m honest. And maybe this would also improve the financial situation…?
I’ll keep quiet now, or else a dev will violently rectify my odd ideas I guess I must anyhow find a solution for a subscription (don’t have a credit card) before giving advices to anyone…
I’m sure some people are reading this and thinking to themselves maynet “of course this is what Scott is going to say, that’s his job.” Well, think what you want, but I was writing about how to take an agile approach several years before joining IBM. In fact, I believe that I’m the first to do so, writing about it in print in my Software Development column back in 2001 and more importantly in my book Agile Modeling: Effective Practices for XP and UP in 2002. And, if you go poking around the web a bit, sohpet you’ll see a lot other have written about this too, including Craig Larman, Ivar Jacobson, Bob Martin, Gary Evans, Doug Rosenberg and many more.
My goal in the following example session is to demonstrate how Ardour functions as a multitrack recording system. I’ve tried to keep technical terminology to a minimum, but this article does not intend to be a primer for digital recording. Basic information on the subject can be found at while more advanced topics are covered at sohbet odalari Many other on-line and hard-copy resources can be found with relevant searches on Google and Amazon.
I must anyhow find a solution for a subscription (don’t have a credit card) before giving advices to anyone…