ardour3 package will not be available anymore

[falkTX]

hey everyone,

after I spoke with ardour developers, it was clear that they don't want any form of ardour3 packages whatsoever.
the previous ardour3 package was deleted from the 'latest' PPA and won't be available anymore.

To the curious ones, the whole chat log is available here:
http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/Paste/U7nUm

Not everything is lost though. KXStudio helps you to compile ardour3 by providing all the libs required.
The whole thing can be installed with:

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get install autotools-dev gettext intltool libboost-dev libcurl4-gnutls-dev
sudo apt-get install libfftw3-dev libraptor1-dev liblrdf0-dev libsigc++-2.0-dev
sudo apt-get install libusb-dev libusb-1.0-0-dev uuid-dev libxml2-dev librasqal3-dev
sudo apt-get install libcairomm-1.0-dev libglade2-dev libglademm-2.4-dev libglib2.0-dev
sudo apt-get install libgnomecanvas2-dev libgnomecanvasmm-2.6-dev libgtkmm-2.4-dev
sudo apt-get install libpango1.0-dev ladspa-sdk libasound2-dev libaubio-dev libjack-dev
sudo apt-get install liblo-dev libsamplerate0-dev liblilv-dev libsuil-dev
sudo apt-get install libsndfile1-dev libsoundtouch-dev lv2-dev vamp-plugin-sdk
sudo apt-get install libcppunit-dev subversion

You get the ardour3 svn code with:

Code: Select all

svn co http://subversion.ardour.org/svn/ardour2/branches/3.0

Ardour3 info about development:
http://www.ardour.org/development

[i2productions]

Wow, that chat log seemed kinda rude. I can understand not wanting SVN's packaged, but no even wanting u to package beta? Although it's one of the few linux packages u just download from ardour.org and double click to install, so basicly any user should be able to do it. And I'm praying for beta4 soon!

[slowpick]

It was clearly stated on the ardour website, but perhaps a giant all caps font was needed
to make people take it seriously.

[falkTX]

It was clearly stated on the ardour website, but perhaps a giant all caps font was needed
to make people take it seriously.

it was very clear when it was alpha, and on that time I refused to packaged it (the 1:1 alpha tarball copy is an exception here).
But when a product enters beta state, it means it's ready for enthusiasts to try and check it out.
Right now it's on Beta3, one would expect they would be more ok with it, no?

anyway, less work for me, and I don't use Ardour at all.

[epicM]

What about your "non-free" (ie Windows) programs? Do you have their creators' permission to package them?

Does Launchpad know you're including Windows apps in your ppa?

[brummer]

Does Launchpad know you're including Windows apps in your ppa?

As far I can see there isn't a problem with hosting proprietary App's on Launchpad (Launchpad isn't debian):
http://blog.launchpad.net/cool-new-stuff/setting-up-commercial-projects-quickly
not that I like that much, but that the way it is.

[slowpick]

It was clearly stated on the ardour website, but perhaps a giant all caps font was needed
to make people take it seriously.

it was very clear when it was alpha, and on that time I refused to packaged it (the 1:1 alpha tarball copy is an exception here).
But when a product enters beta state, it means it's ready for enthusiasts to try and check it out.
Right now it's on Beta3, one would expect they would be more ok with it, no?

anyway, less work for me, and I don't use Ardour at all.

beta just means unfinished, who has access to any alpha or beta or pre-release
yada yada is up to the author. Ardour is a unique case, the flagship linux DAW, while also
linked in the business world to Mixbus. Having search engines load up on user complaints
and confusion would be bad for business. With several good daws already on the market,
and prices falling, Ardour needs every advantage to establish itself.

If linux media devs all started working together, Avid and Steinberg would have to start making
video games for a living.

[falkTX]

What about your "non-free" (ie Windows) programs? Do you have their creators' permission to package them?

Does Launchpad know you're including Windows apps in your ppa?

I *do not* have non-free apps in Launchpad, because it's not allowed (that includes WineASIO, VSTs, or even libflashsupport-jack).
I had problems in the past because of that, and I've learn my lesson.

Have you read http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/KXStudio:Repositories ?

Additionally there is a non-free repository hosted outside Lauchpad (for restricted or closed-source applications).
This repository is not managed by the KXStudio Team, but by falkTX only.

For those apps that I include there, yes, I have permission.
Most developers were kind enough to just tell "yes", but for REAPER I had to sign an agreement.

@brummer:
You can only have proprietary apps in Launchpad if you are the author of them.
Here's some background - https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/93921

[brummer]

@brummer:
You can only have proprietary apps in Launchpad if you are the author of them.
Here's some background - https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/93921

Great, I'm happy that I get this wrong.

Only here it is mention that it is possible to host close source applications along with a open source project:
https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/52348
So the situation seems to be a bit unclear at all.

[Jaaxx]

I've had similar discussions with Paul and co in the past, back when I used to do audio packaging for PCLinuxOS and RocXshoP. They were having major headaches with bugfixing Ardour 2 because there were dozens of packages out there compiled against dozens of different versioned libraries. That's when the decision was made to release 3.0 "bundled" with static libs so that everyone is on the same page so to speak.

It actually makes a lot of sense when you are dealing with such a complex set of libs that are constantly in flux.

However, I'm not sure I agree with what they have done as of yesterday, which is purposely disabling a feature (in this case ./waf install) to sabotage anyone's effort to build from SVN on their own. Sure you can still build and run it via ./ardev, but you really can't package it for distribution. Well, you can, just not with any reasonable amount of effort. It's a shame that people without the skills necessary to build A3 on their own can't follow along with the development.

[slowpick]

It's a shame that people without the skills necessary to build A3 on their own can't follow along with the development.

the point of them releasing mouseclick
installers is so windows-level people CAN test it, and report issues, without polluting
cyberspace, and future search engine results, with epic sagas and dire misinformation,
that will hurt their families financial well-being.

RocXshoP is a cool distro, went way far under the radar. Still use pclinuxos
and Puppy Studio for recording, none of that buntu drama and
endless config nightmares waking like zombies with each release candidate

[funkmuscle]

RocXshoP is a cool distro, went way far under the radar. Still use pclinuxos
and Puppy Studio for recording, none of that buntu drama and
endless config nightmares waking like zombies with each release candidate

I'm with you there about the Buntus... you do make sense on the Ardour reasons.. I guess some kinda control would be nice.

[falkTX]

Ardour beta4 is out!

I re-uploaded the 'ardour3' package to the latest PPA again, using the same code as the beta4 version.
It's beta4 (latest beta they say). If this is not good enough for a package, I don't know what is...
(Maybe they'll not want packaging even when the final 3.0 version is out? )

EDIT: I just tested the official ardour3 beta4 binaries and they are broken for non-gtk2 plugin GUIs, so the kxstudio package is actually *necessary* to use ardour3 right now (or else expect crashes when opening certain plugin UIs).

[i2productions]

Now that Ardour3 beta 4a has been released I just wana go out on a limb and say, THIS IS NOW THE BEST, MOST COMPLETE PIECE OF LINUX AUDIO SOFTWARE OUT THERE!! I was finally able to accomplish an entire song(very basic 4/4 house track, but just a test) in a 1 hour sitting using Ardour 3 and Reason 5(via wineasio) without any glitches, bugs, or force quits! I see why they say this is the last beta. It's finally all coming together. Pro Tools watch out, you've got a run for your money!

[karm]

Maybe they'll not want packaging even when the final 3.0 version is out?

I think sarcasm is not necessary. Sure, they could be a little more polite but on the other hand they made themselves clear they do not want packaging for some reason and taking their work into account I think it would be better to just respect that and wait for final release.