Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

What other apps and distros do you use to round out your studio?

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

User avatar
Largos
Established Member
Posts: 616
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 12:21 pm
Has thanked: 70 times
Been thanked: 179 times

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by Largos »

As a user, I don't think it's a good idea to name a fork so close to the original. It does seem a bit malevolent in the context of whatever disagreements have been had. That aside, it is also confusing to the user because it appears more like a new version from the original author than a fork and if you aren't aware of this acrimony, you might be misled into thinking wrongly.

I guess session managers can get software to work together well but not so much the devs :wink:
nils
Established Member
Posts: 537
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:05 pm
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 94 times
Contact:

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by nils »

grammo wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 2:03 pm Let me first say that I appreciate someone is stepping up. I've said enough about this issue and it takes me too much time and energy to really accomplish something, it's up to others now, but let me try to give a 'short' reaction.

The first and major problem is the ongoing involvement of linuxaudio.org. Finally they won't release as linuxaudio.org anymore, but tt's still maintained by linuxaudio.org thoug,h as is apparent because of the fact it is still hosted and maintained on the linuxaudio.org github page. Issues are reported there etc. etc. It's more then hosting alone, moreover there is no practical need to host it for them.

1) Clear and simple: they should remove all connection to linuxaudio.org. Host the project on their own website or github page. It restores balance and keeps linuxaudio.org neutral. This is what forks do normally. Nobody wants a 'hostile' fork of his GPL project being hosted/maintained by linuxaudio.org suddenly.

2) The naming. NSM stands for Non-Session-Manager and it should stay so. Of course you can build your own GUI around it, like it's done with Agordejo and Raysession. NSM should be treated as it was trademarked, the same way as Tytel has done with Vital I think.
The disadvantages and 'not so nice' points about the name New-Session-Manager are discussed elsewhere, I won't repeat it here. Somehow, there should be a other name.

3) As long the NSM API stays the same, there is no real problem, but they claimed the API and are changing it. I'm not a programmer, but the original author states: " I specifically designed NSM to be modular and extensible, designing in support for such things as alternative GUis". And from what I can see most extra features are possible to implement via a alternative GUI. If not, they probably need to design a way to make extensions for NSM or so, but again, I'm not a programmer, the original author is perfectly capable of giving his vision on this matter, so ideally he would do it.

Of course, saying that this is 'the community version', implicitly implies that the original version isn't a community version. It's not up to them to decide, I would say that with 30 apps supporting it... It's not nice to say it, but if they don't want to remove it, what can you do?

What can be done is: remove all connection with linuxaudio.org.

Next to that you're dependent of how much they want to take in account the hard work of the original author, who solved a major problem for the community, which they copied. How much the emotion of revenge should play a role here. How much they care about keeping NSM compatible with their implementation. How far they want to go with the fragmentation of the NSM environment and it's API. How much 'feature creep' is wise to implement. It's GPL, so people can do with it what they want more or less. The license doesn't give the original developer almost no protection. You would hope that some protection comes from the community and especially the developers of the fork themselves. The last thing you want is linuxaudio.org hosting and maintaining such a fork.

This is my take on the matter. I don't have the intention to respond on further discussion, but I found it exemplary that the discussion was going in a direction where people warn developers to understand the licenses fully. I think that should say something.

I've done enough in this realm, it's up to others to pick things up. Start with point 1 I would suggest.
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Let me tell you a story. I develop this app called "BackupBand" which is an auto-accompaniment program (and a simple ROMpler as well). Basically, it turns your computer into something much like hardware musical instruments such as Yamaha's PSR and Tyros arrangers. Korg's PA series, Roland's BK models, etc.

Now, I have specific features I use, for specific purposes. For example, I prefer ALSA's API to JACK's. In fact, I dislike JACK. Furthermore, I don't like command line operated software, or ugly/primitive/fragile methods of interaction (such as "pipes"). I prefer a GUI that is tightly integrated into the app.

So does BackupBand allow you to use JACK? Yes, because there were some endusers who wanted it, and I had time to implement the feature. Do I use that feature? No. A guy contacted me, and wanted to use my software in a kit he was selling that takes a Raspberry PI, and turns it into something like those Lowrey, Thomas, Hammond "home theatre organs". He was creating a software GUI (in java I believe) that loaded SetBFree (for the organ sound) and BackupBand (for the accompaniment) as separate processes that were tied together via basically software pipes. Would I personally use such an arrangement? No.

Furthermore, since he was using SetBFree for the user-playable sounds, he didn't need the ROMpler part of my app.

So, did I scream that he was creating a fork that fundamentally changed the way I personally wanted my code to work, and was cutting out "important" features? Far from it. I license GPL so that people can use the code the way they want. And I mean it. I made a utility that asks a person a series of questions about what specific BackupBand features he wants. And when the questionaire is done, the utility spits out a makefile that compiles a version of BackupBand that has only those features the person wants. So this guy didn't have to "study" my source code to deduce what code to get rid of for his custom use (and very likely break something in the parts he wants to keep). 5 minutes with my utility did the work for him -- giving him a working custom version that doesn't operate the way I would use it, and for which I have no personal use.

I've also given him detailed advice on how to setup BackupBand in a way that I'll never do, because that doesn't work for me. But it works for him. And that's the point of licensing it gpl.

If you're not the kind of developer who can exhibit this sort of attitude toward his code, don't license it gpl.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

nils
Established Member
Posts: 537
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:05 pm
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 94 times
Contact:

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by nils »

grammo wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 2:03 pm The first and major problem is the ongoing involvement of linuxaudio.org. Finally they won't release as linuxaudio.org anymore, but tt's still maintained by linuxaudio.org thoug,h as is apparent because of the fact it is still hosted and maintained on the linuxaudio.org github page. Issues are reported there etc. etc. It's more then hosting alone, moreover there is no practical need to host it for them.

1) Clear and simple: they should remove all connection to linuxaudio.org. Host the project on their own website or github page. It restores balance and keeps linuxaudio.org neutral. This is what forks do normally. Nobody wants a 'hostile' fork of his GPL project being hosted/maintained by linuxaudio.org suddenly.
[...]
Start with point 1 I would suggest.
All right.

Effective immediately, "New Session Manager" has been removed from the linuxaudio.org Github repository. Announcements will no longer be made from software@linuxaudio.org. All references to the linuxaudio.org domain or consortium have been removed from the code.
New URLs: https://new-session-manager.jackaudio.org/ and https://github.com/jackaudio/new-session-manager
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

In the spirit of cooperation, I've decided to also move my "Not Session Manager" project from the LinuxAudio.org website to a web server at my employer, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

I won't bother providing the link, as my NSA-NSM software has already been secretly installed upon every computer ever manufactured... including yours.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

User avatar
rncbc
Established Member
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 12:20 pm
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 256 times
Contact:

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by rncbc »

nilshi wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:06 pm All right.
i think it is not. but maybe it's just me...
nilshi wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:06 pm Effective immediately, "New Session Manager" has been removed from the linuxaudio.org Github repository. Announcements will no longer be made from software@linuxaudio.org. All references to the linuxaudio.org domain or consortium have been removed from the code.
New URLs: https://new-session-manager.jackaudio.org/ and https://github.com/jackaudio/new-session-manager
as I've expressed on IRC (#jack) when this move was taken, I'll ask you what does jackaudio.org have to do with the new(er)-session-manager, at all?

this is all IMNSHO disgusting and sounds like "oops, I did it again" all over...

which part of
grammo wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 2:03 pmHost the project on their own website or github page...
did you not seem to get right?

here we go again...
j_e_f_f_g
Established Member
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:48 pm
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by j_e_f_f_g »

Oh dear. In an effort to avoid offending absolutely anyone, I have now removed my "Not Session Manager" from jackaudio.org and acquired a new domain for it at:

www.qtractor_qjackctl_qsynth.com

Now if you all will excuse me, I hear my spaghetti boiling on the stove, so I'm off to stir something up elsewhere.

Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.

User avatar
rncbc
Established Member
Posts: 1060
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 12:20 pm
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 256 times
Contact:

Re: Non-Session-Manager fork descalation

Post by rncbc »

j_e_f_f_g wrote: Tue Mar 23, 2021 3:51 pm Oh dear. In an effort to avoid offending absolutely anyone, I have now removed my "Not Session Manager" from jackaudio.org and acquired a new domain for it at:

www.qtractor_qjackctl_qsynth.com

Now if you all will excuse me, I hear my spaghetti boiling on the stove, so I'm off to stir something up elsewhere.
not feeling offended here, not the least :)

however, besides qtractor, only the vee-ones refer to NSM and only in their standalone forms:
all the other qstuff (qjackctl, qsynth, qsampler, etc.) have no business whatsoever with NSM...
so that you've been notified :)

byee

ps. also: I've already reverted all NSM references to the original, on all (my) qstuff projects and their resp. websites. sorry for that.
Locked