On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:39 AM, alex stone <compose59@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Deep in the basement of the OpenOctaveProject, the team have been >> working hard, to bring OpenOctaveMidi into the modern age. From the >> new interface, to the workflow features, OOM2 is the result of a great >> deal of hard work, and thought. In our Project journey towards a great >> Linux Audio pipeline, OOM2 represents the next important step. > > I think it would be a little more respectful if you notified this > crowd precisely which *existing* codebase you "put a blowtorch to". i > already know the answer, but i think it would better to hear it from > you guys. altering the indentation and global search-and-replace of > the project name does not constitute much of a blowtorch. > > while i admire what you are trying to do with OOM/OOM2, the forking of > an existing, well-known project, without any attribution whatsoever, > or even acknowledgement of the fork, is troubling to say the least. if > you had done this with ardour, i'd be raising bloody hell about it. > there's absolutely nothing wrong with a fork (other than potentially > being a waste of developer resources), but i do think that not even > *naming* the well-known project that OOM2 is based on is close to > morally problematic, and perhaps worse. > > --p > I find this hardly surprising, but sadly predictable. For all the effort that went into not only OOM1 for USERS, and OOM2 for USERS, you've implied that somehow we're "scum" because we didn't publicly acknowledge the codebase, when we'd already been told to fork, and go our own way. Why is that anything to do with you? We've attributed correctly, and reached an agreement with the current code team, out of mutual courtesy. Why do you feel you need to be notified, as if it's a requirement? You should ask yourself why we picked Werner's great work, with the formidable wealth of great midi tools under the skin. I also find it sad that users came to us to get better tools, to do simple tasks in applications, that they'd failed to get any enthusiasm for after they'd done the rounds. You'd be surprised how many users have turned up to get shortcuts (Yes,shortcuts), or navigation improvements, or other fundamental workflow functions. I'm not looking for a fight with anyone in the community, on the contrary, i've put 3 and half solid years into trying to contribute many years of experience into programs, and with the except of the notable few devs who have great skills, class and style, and make the effort to see the user's perspective, we, as a team with a particular use case, got generally derided and dismissed. Fair enough, devs make their own decisions, as do we. But i won't tolerate your implication that we're somehow "not nice people" because you didn't have a part in any discussion we might have had. Enough of this political nonsense, i'm off to do more for our project, a GPL project, which hopefully will serve the needs of many users for years to come, with tools user can enjoy for many years to come. I'm not surprised at your swift attach, and tacky implications. On the contrary, i'm only surprised it took you so long. No doubt you'll continue this as long as it's newsworthy, so..... Enjoy yourself, Alex. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
