On 11 September 2013 21:29, Christopher R. Antila <crantila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 09/11/2013 12:42 PM, Sean Beeson wrote: >> Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19? >> >> If so, does anyone have any good how to on dealing with the dependencies? > > Hi Sean: > > With little effort, I found these instructions for Ardour 3.1: > https://blogs.fsfe.org/samtuke/?p=548 > > Please let us know whether they still work. > > However, I feel we should start a discussion on what to do about Ardour, > now that they have asked distributions not to package their software. > This is actually a serious ethical dilemma. > Have they actually done this? I can't see any mention on the site and the only thing in the source appears to be "PACKAGER_README" which has a note about naming the package if built with VST support and the templates directory. If anything that note suggests they're still okay with packaging. If they had then they'd be saying two different things: it's licensed GPL which is Ardour saying it's okay to use it in accordance with the GPL (there's no mention of the GPL on the Ardour site, the license is well hidden now). At the same time they are trying hard to prevent access to the source code and steer people to paying them. I can understand why, but what if all the libraries it depended on did the same thing (most of which seem to be LGPL)? > I favour the first or second options, since the free software audio > community is so small that we can't afford the added difficulty of using > such an important piece of software. On the other hand, the free > software audio community is so small that we can't afford creating a > rift with the Ardour developers. If we choose one of these options, we > should be sure to involve the developers in our decision-making process. > Involve might be the wrong word, but yes, need clarification on this issue. Another Wodim wouldn't be great. It's a pity if it is the case, the package model is so widespread on the main distros that the likely effect of dropping it is that we get lots more requests about why it isn't included and Ardour gets fewer users on Linux as people give up or find alternatives. > If the SIG wishes, I would be happy to research the state of Ardour in > other distributions. I have a guess what the Ubuntu approach to this is... -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk _______________________________________________ music mailing list music@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
