We need a Linux Music Standard
Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 2348
- Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:13 am
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 468 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Ups, that is a totally wrong conclusion. Debain consist in branches, from old stable to sid. Debian sid is mostly up to date like arch is, and, is a rolling release. I use it now longer then 20 years, and if I wouldn't update my hardware, I would run the very first installation I've made, still, up to date.
On top, if you would see your work adapted into debian, your barrier is debian/sid. You've to ensure that your project works flawless with debian sid. Only then, when it get accepted in debian/sid it could go into testing and later on into stable.
(Don't mention the experimental debian branch here, as it only play a role during the freeze phase)
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 1392
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:13 pm
- Has thanked: 168 times
- Been thanked: 247 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Why then is jeff complaining about software in the repos being out of date? He obviously isn't using sid. A rolling release of any sort would solve the problem of out-of-date software in the repos.
- erlkönig
- Established Member
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 8:58 am
- Has thanked: 42 times
- Been thanked: 48 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Currently working with
https://www.honeysuckers.rocks/?lang=en
Fiddling with sequencers does not evolve into music necessarily and Mac users have smelly feet and guzzle little children.
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 2348
- Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:13 am
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 468 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Unstable in that context means that system library's could be updated, as well as applications. They are not bound to a stable release tag.
But, at least you self decide when doing a update and when not. So, when you are in the middle of a production, you be carefully before update your system, that's all. There is no diff to any other rolling release like arch.
As a developer, you may want to look ahead to ensure that your work not break within the next release of a stable distribution, so, in my opinion, best development platform is a rolling release. As far I remember that was what the opening post was about.
Try to tell developers to use a old stable distribution is like telling musicians not to use any instruments.
- thetotalchaos
- Established Member
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 8:29 pm
- Has thanked: 55 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
- Contact:
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
The idea is good, but the devil is in details. MacOS and Windows are not one guy. They are massive companies, with money and status.
AVLinux is one guy, KXStudio is one guy. Even ubuntu studio is not a main project of Canonical.
Linux Audio have the advantage of Jack and Linux-RT, that can provide the best performance on theory, compared to the proprietary alternatives.
Currently, the biggest linux audio project is Debian Multimedia.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
Take a journey to wonderland with The Butterfly Effect 2016
https://totalchaos-music.bandcamp.com/a ... fly-effect
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:55 am
- Location: Vladivostok
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 124 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Do you have a comparison with others repos?thetotalchaos wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 6:58 pm ...
Currently, the biggest linux audio project is Debian Multimedia.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
- thetotalchaos
- Established Member
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 8:29 pm
- Has thanked: 55 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
- Contact:
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
I don't, but the internet does.Kott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 10:24 pmDo you have a comparison with others repos?thetotalchaos wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 6:58 pm ...
Currently, the biggest linux audio project is Debian Multimedia.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
https://salsa.debian.org/multimedia-team?page=1
Take a journey to wonderland with The Butterfly Effect 2016
https://totalchaos-music.bandcamp.com/a ... fly-effect
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:55 am
- Location: Vladivostok
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 124 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
I'm aware of this repo, and it's not a comparison.thetotalchaos wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 10:53 pmI don't, but the internet does.Kott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 10:24 pmDo you have a comparison with others repos?thetotalchaos wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 6:58 pm ...
Currently, the biggest linux audio project is Debian Multimedia.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
https://salsa.debian.org/multimedia-team?page=1
Simple question, how many lv2, vst(3), standalone effects/instruments it provides?
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
I'm not saying "Devs, don't release your source code. Release only a binary, and thereby force everyone to use some sort of lowest common denominator."
I'm saying "Devs, don't release only your source code, and expect distro makers and/or endusers to compile binaries. Nowadays, distro makers can't keep their repos uptodate with all the software out there. And most endusers either don't know how, or don't want to, compile software. Therefore. also include a binary, compiled on a minimal base standard that should make it runnable on most distros. This is needed to bridge the gap in enduser ease-of-use between Linux versus Windows and MacOS".
If you're a person whose knee-jerk reaction is to reply "I don't want to be forced to use that binary.", then stop posting in this thread. Because you just don't get it, and you're arguing with a straw man.
Now, there is some debate about the best way to produce linux binaries. The available choices are:
1) Keep the current trend of expecting every distro maintainer to sync to the latest version of your software in their repos. Or every enduser to compile your source code.
Does nothing to solve the ease-of-use gap, and ignores the reality that endusers overwhelmingly do not want to compile code, and distro maintainers can no longer keep their repos uptodate. Not a solution.
2) Use AppImage, Snap, Flatpack, or some sort of "container" technology that "tethers" a binary and its dependencies.
It works. But it's not ideal for production of real-time content like audio/video.
Unfortunately, this is where linux binaries are going. Expect more distro makers cutting back the selection of software in their repos, and instead forcing endusers to rely upon snap, flatpack, etc binaries for esoteric stuff like music production apps. If we don't get music devs to target testing/deployment of binaries to some minimum standard music base, then this is our future.
3) Get music devs to target testing/deployment of binaries to some minimum standard music base. Educate them about the need to include those binaries in their releases. And as an aside, get people who completely miss the point to stop trying to derail the effort.
Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:55 am
- Location: Vladivostok
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 124 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
5. Use GH Action for similar task, more flexible, but no repositories in result, just binaries.
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Stop right there. We don't need solutions from privately owned commercial entities, pay-for services, or the like. Start another thread if you want to discuss those.
suse, github, etc are irrelevant to what i proposed.
Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:55 am
- Location: Vladivostok
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 124 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
I wont.
who "we"?We don't need solutions from privately owned commercial entities, pay-for services, or the like. Start another thread if you want to discuss those.
suse, github, etc are irrelevant to what i proposed.
you're using internet and sourceforge for your programs, aint that the "privately owned entities"?
-
- Established Member
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2020 1:18 am
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
In short, you are trying to force what is essentially a LTS distribution to run software that is designed for more bleeding edge systems. Why? Just use a distribution that is already up to date. Developers shouldn't have to release software that's missing features that could be available to them with newer versions of the dependencies. Otherwise what's the point of releasing new versions?
Re: We need a Linux Music Standard
Context, man.Kott wrote: who "we"?
I'm talking to, and about, developers of linux music software. If the issue of making it easier for users to get music app binaries is to be improved, then devs are the ones to do it. Distro packagers are overtaxed and falling behind. Users lack the skills, and typically the inclination, to do it. The ball's in the devs' court.
Not to create/test my binaries (which I provide). I do that myself.you're using sourceforge for your programs
Author of BackupBand at https://sourceforge.net/projects/backupband/files/
My fans show their support by mentioning my name in their signature.