On 29 Nov 2011, at 07:12, "D. Michael McIntyre" <michael.mcint...@rosegardenmusic.com> wrote:
> I think some of the > fundamental design decisions were really questionable in retrospect, but > we've > all inherited that legacy, myself included. Ok I'll bite. Rosegarden has always been a compromise between a notation editor and MIDI editor and latterly an audio workstation too. The whole design is therefore a compromise and we've done nothing more or less than any other piece of software that has to deal with. The tricky part has always been maintaining a balance while introducing new features. It's not one person's vision - it's several - therefore stuff gets funky. I was interested to see what was going to happen with OpenOctave when they were using RG. Since they changed to using Muse (?) I guess they came across similar challenges. I do agree that fundamentally it probably doesn't work as a design but by definition it was never going to. As long as you keep thinking like that it works. BTW has anyone considered splitting RG up? I'm playing around with the Windows port again and I might just end up throwing a lot of stuff away if I can't easily implement it. If that is the case then there might be an opportunity to reexamine the core to see what is really necessary/popular. R ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list Rosegarden-devel@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
