Jono Bacon wrote: >This moves me onto another point, and I would love to hear your >thoughts on this. I have heard a few loose comments around different >parts of the net that Ardour is not quite the same as other Open >Source projects. I have heard that development occurs between a fairly >limited set of developers, and only a few developers drive the >direction of development. I also read somewhere that the testing team >is restricted to a specific group of people and that the author may >even charge for accessing the development version in the future. Is >any of this true? How have you found the development of Ardour to be? >I have not really looked into it, so these points I have heard may be >rubbish, but I would love to hear your thoughts. > > I've been an on-again/off-again lightweight tester for a while, but I'll try to address those concerns. I don't believe "restrictive" is the right term. CVS write access is of limited to the core development and testing crews, and direct download from CVS by a normal user requires Paul's permission. For those who don't want/need immediate CVS access, a nightly CVS snapshot is available in a tarball. I'd say Paul is as "restrictive" as Linus Torvalds. I doubt Paul would charge for the devel version. I've heard various scenarios for making Ardour pay off in hard currency, but I think its developers closer concern is to get 1.0 out the door in creditable shape. Btw, you can check out Ardour development in realtime on its IRC channel, #ardour on freenet. :) Best, dp
