Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] Kdenlive [Was: Manual Test Cases]
On 2016-02-18 00:47, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, at 12:24 AM, Ross Gammon wrote: The package set needs to be updated to match the packages we are interested in now (it looks very old). At the Community Council checkup meeting in IRC, I was encouraged to become a member. So after the 16.04 release I might begin working towards that :-) That would be great, I think. You should have no problem becoming a member, and I'm sure you can get upload rights to the package set as well in time. I haven't followed your packaging work very closely, but I believe what is needed is simply understanding of the Debian policy and a bit of packaging experience, in a way that your work is persistent and reliable. Our packages serve as a soft start, in a way. I will gladly make myself more informed and support you if you apply for upload rights. This is great news! Could it mean that you Ross, and i will become lead-team? It sounds much better than Team-Leader. :) I have written a test for rapid photo management. but i haven't found the time to format it yet. kdenlive is otherway arround : i have the template :p but it crashes on me and fights me on every machine. Good to read the kdenlive case is being looked into! Yours, Set -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] Kdenlive [Was: Manual Test Cases]
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, at 12:24 AM, Ross Gammon wrote: > The package set needs to be updated to match the packages we are > interested in now (it looks very old). At the Community Council checkup > meeting in IRC, I was encouraged to become a member. So after the 16.04 > release I might begin working towards that :-) > That would be great, I think. You should have no problem becoming a member, and I'm sure you can get upload rights to the package set as well in time. I haven't followed your packaging work very closely, but I believe what is needed is simply understanding of the Debian policy and a bit of packaging experience, in a way that your work is persistent and reliable. Our packages serve as a soft start, in a way. I will gladly make myself more informed and support you if you apply for upload rights. -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
[ubuntu-studio-devel] Kdenlive [Was: Manual Test Cases]
On 02/16/2016 03:26 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016, at 08:43 PM, Ross Gammon wrote: >> On 02/10/2016 03:31 AM, lukefro...@hushmail.com wrote: >>> Exactly which version of kdenlive will be in 16.04? I have been building >>> kdenlive >>> from git master routinely, and here's what I've found: the 15.08 release >>> was a >>> buggy mess, 15.12 is very good, both can handle GPU/Movit effects, and the >>> upcoming 16.04 kdenlive will have many new features which right now change >>> seemingly every day. >>> >> >> Hmmm. At the moment it is 15.08. But Debian sid has 15.12. Kdenlive does >> not appear in the list of pending merges though. It might be that it has >> not automatically synced because the ubuntu version includes an epoch >> "4:" and it seems like the Debian version is older? >> >> I will see if I can get 15.12 merged. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdenlive/+bug/1546803 > Isn't Kdenlive packages by Kubuntu folks now, since it was added to the > KDE family? They are the ones who do that work, usually, so please > contact them. Yes, they have been maintaining the difference to Debian, because of some bugs which I believe have been fixed in the new version. I have subscribed them to the bug so they can jump in if they need to. > Kdenlive is in Kubuntu's package set, as seen here > http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/packagesets/xenial/kubuntu. > We have one too, but none of us has upload rights to our package set. > kdenlive is not in our package set, believe it or not > http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/packagesets/xenial/ubuntustudio. > The package set needs to be updated to match the packages we are interested in now (it looks very old). At the Community Council checkup meeting in IRC, I was encouraged to become a member. So after the 16.04 release I might begin working towards that :-) -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] Default Wallpaper Design, WAS: Re: ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15
On 2016-02-17 22:23, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 08:44 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 08:39 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: I have an idea, which I do think we should be able to get done. It's pretty simple, and symbolic. It should not be hard to make it look good. These are some possible elements of the image that we could develop together: * Incorporate the CoF somehow * A fairly dark and neutral background color. * Three fuzzy lights, like stage lights, each one representing a main category (blue for audio, but the exact colors for graphics and video need to be reevaluated). * Visual elements from the kind of digital tools we provide, like sequencer graphics (not a real sequencer, but a simple design), 3D model fundamentals, a photograph, that sort of thing The visual elements could be in a single color, using the category colors for each. That way, three fuzzy lights may be superfluous, and the image would be even more focused. # Did a mockup, but not going to show you yet I took some time to play around. I found that using three colors for the background works pretty well. It sits right, both visually and symbolically. So, I really feel like doing something with the three colors as basis is the way to go. I don't have a mockup worthy to show you, but just want to spill my thoughts on that, in case someone wants to pick this up and do some stuff with it. # About the colors The colors that feel the most right to me are: * blue for audio (our standard blue, used for our CoF) * orange for graphics * purple for video The logic behind the colors: Purple is a mix between red and blue, just as video is a mix of audio and graphics. Orange is not red, but close enough. Pure red may be too aggressive. On top of that, both orange and purple are used a lot of Ubuntu vanilla, so there's that too. If having the colors side by side, purple seems the best fit to have in the middle, considering the relationship between the colors. I would put blue to the left (which from a western POW is the start of a page). We are already using those colors in ubuntustudio-menu, but that doesn't mean we can't change them, if we want. I would like to revisit the exact hue of those though. # Schedule I'm not going to work too intensively on this myself during the next week, at least. But, I will revisit as soon as I'm able. We should have a final candidate of the default wallpaper ready about 1 month before release (final beta), but we can always make last minute changes, if we really need to. Sounds like a plan to me! -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
[ubuntu-studio-devel] Default Wallpaper Design, WAS: Re: ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 08:44 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 08:39 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > > > > I have an idea, which I do think we should be able to get done. It's > > pretty simple, and symbolic. It should not be hard to make it look good. > > > > These are some possible elements of the image that we could develop > > together: > > > > * Incorporate the CoF somehow > > * A fairly dark and neutral background color. > > * Three fuzzy lights, like stage lights, each one representing a main > > category (blue for audio, but the exact colors for graphics and video > > need to be reevaluated). > > * Visual elements from the kind of digital tools we provide, like > > sequencer graphics (not a real sequencer, but a simple design), 3D model > > fundamentals, a photograph, that sort of thing > > The visual elements could be in a single color, using the category > colors for each. That way, three fuzzy lights may be superfluous, and > the image would be even more focused. > # Did a mockup, but not going to show you yet I took some time to play around. I found that using three colors for the background works pretty well. It sits right, both visually and symbolically. So, I really feel like doing something with the three colors as basis is the way to go. I don't have a mockup worthy to show you, but just want to spill my thoughts on that, in case someone wants to pick this up and do some stuff with it. # About the colors The colors that feel the most right to me are: * blue for audio (our standard blue, used for our CoF) * orange for graphics * purple for video The logic behind the colors: Purple is a mix between red and blue, just as video is a mix of audio and graphics. Orange is not red, but close enough. Pure red may be too aggressive. On top of that, both orange and purple are used a lot of Ubuntu vanilla, so there's that too. If having the colors side by side, purple seems the best fit to have in the middle, considering the relationship between the colors. I would put blue to the left (which from a western POW is the start of a page). We are already using those colors in ubuntustudio-menu, but that doesn't mean we can't change them, if we want. I would like to revisit the exact hue of those though. # Schedule I'm not going to work too intensively on this myself during the next week, at least. But, I will revisit as soon as I'm able. We should have a final candidate of the default wallpaper ready about 1 month before release (final beta), but we can always make last minute changes, if we really need to. -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 08:39 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > > I have an idea, which I do think we should be able to get done. It's > pretty simple, and symbolic. It should not be hard to make it look good. > > These are some possible elements of the image that we could develop > together: > > * Incorporate the CoF somehow > * A fairly dark and neutral background color. > * Three fuzzy lights, like stage lights, each one representing a main > category (blue for audio, but the exact colors for graphics and video > need to be reevaluated). > * Visual elements from the kind of digital tools we provide, like > sequencer graphics (not a real sequencer, but a simple design), 3D model > fundamentals, a photograph, that sort of thing The visual elements could be in a single color, using the category colors for each. That way, three fuzzy lights may be superfluous, and the image would be even more focused. -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 01:48 PM, Jimmy Sjölund wrote: > > > On 17 February 2016 13:11:28 +01:00, C. F. Howlett > wrote: > > > Perhaps it would an opportune moment for our very own team to supply a > > new design?? It *has* been awhile and this will an LTS ... > > > > Absolutely. That was a previous goal for 16.04, but I'm hesitant if there > > is enough time left to pull it off. Rather than to create something quick > > that might not "hold its standard" until the next LTS. > I have an idea, which I do think we should be able to get done. It's pretty simple, and symbolic. It should not be hard to make it look good. These are some possible elements of the image that we could develop together: * Incorporate the CoF somehow * A fairly dark and neutral background color. * Three fuzzy lights, like stage lights, each one representing a main category (blue for audio, but the exact colors for graphics and video need to be reevaluated). * Visual elements from the kind of digital tools we provide, like sequencer graphics (not a real sequencer, but a simple design), 3D model fundamentals, a photograph, that sort of thing We then use the material to create the wallpaper, artwork for our website, social channels and for our merchandise. Everyone could contribute with specific elements to the whole. Someone should be responsible for putting it all together, with feedback from others (I could do initial work for this, but then someone more suitable should finish it). Does this seem sensible? Would this work? -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] Default Wallpaper, WAS:Re: ART TEAM ALERT! 16.04 Wallpaper Contest has been decided.
"Found on the Internet" could be those bastards at Getty Images, who would get a lot of free publicity for their extortion letters from a well publicized even though failed demand letter against Canonical. Don't use unknown source images unless everyone involved is OK with standing up to extortionists. Getty doesn't sue, they just send extortion letters. One of my websites warns them of $10,000 liquidated damages for every access to it in TOS that forbid their "picscout" bot from scraping it, thus putting their demand letters in reverse gear. On 2/17/2016 at 3:34 AM, "Kaj Ailomaa" wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 03:58 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 03:54 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: >> >> > I already sent an email to the guy, but realized we have other >concerns >> > too. For 14.04, the wallpaper was not just a wallpaper. It was >a theme >> > used for all our social channels. If we want to continue to >have a >> > generic theme, which we use for everything, I'm not sure a >flame will do >> > it. The flame could be a variant of it, but not the "it". >> >> This is my initial opinion, by the way. If flames were to be >used as a >> generic theme, I believe they would need to be stylized somehow. >It's >> still a bit weird for a generic theming, I think. >> > >I got word from lihualiu, the author of the proposed default >wallpaper. >Unfortunately he is not interested in further work, but supplied >me with >the original project file, which is a photoshop project. The flame >is >found on the internet, but I haven't asked from where exactly. So, >all >in all, I'm a little reluctant to use this as the default wallpaper >right now. > >-- >ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list >ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com >Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15
On 17 February 2016 13:11:28 +01:00, C. F. Howlett wrote: > Perhaps it would an opportune moment for our very own team to supply a > new design?? It *has* been awhile and this will an LTS ... > > Absolutely. That was a previous goal for 16.04, but I'm hesitant if there is > enough time left to pull it off. Rather than to create something quick that > might not "hold its standard" until the next LTS. /Jimmy -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15
Perhaps it would an opportune moment for our very own team to supply a new design?? It *has* been awhile and this will an LTS ... On 02/17/2016 09:00 PM, ubuntu-studio-devel-requ...@lists.ubuntu.com wrote: > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 09:34:32 +0100 > From: Kaj Ailomaa > To: ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com > Subject: Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] Default Wallpaper, WAS:Re: ART > TEAM ALERT! 16.04 Wallpaper Contest has been decided. > Message-ID: > <1455698072.1240087.523554970.53065...@webmail.messagingengine.com> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 03:58 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: >> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 03:54 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: >> > >>> > > I already sent an email to the guy, but realized we have other concerns >>> > > too. For 14.04, the wallpaper was not just a wallpaper. It was a theme >>> > > used for all our social channels. If we want to continue to have a >>> > > generic theme, which we use for everything, I'm not sure a flame will do >>> > > it. The flame could be a variant of it, but not the "it". >> > >> > This is my initial opinion, by the way. If flames were to be used as a >> > generic theme, I believe they would need to be stylized somehow. It's >> > still a bit weird for a generic theming, I think. >> > > I got word from lihualiu, the author of the proposed default wallpaper. > Unfortunately he is not interested in further work, but supplied me with > the original project file, which is a photoshop project. The flame is > found on the internet, but I haven't asked from where exactly. So, all > in all, I'm a little reluctant to use this as the default wallpaper > right now. > -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] Default Wallpaper, WAS:Re: ART TEAM ALERT! 16.04 Wallpaper Contest has been decided.
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 03:58 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016, at 03:54 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote: > > > I already sent an email to the guy, but realized we have other concerns > > too. For 14.04, the wallpaper was not just a wallpaper. It was a theme > > used for all our social channels. If we want to continue to have a > > generic theme, which we use for everything, I'm not sure a flame will do > > it. The flame could be a variant of it, but not the "it". > > This is my initial opinion, by the way. If flames were to be used as a > generic theme, I believe they would need to be stylized somehow. It's > still a bit weird for a generic theming, I think. > I got word from lihualiu, the author of the proposed default wallpaper. Unfortunately he is not interested in further work, but supplied me with the original project file, which is a photoshop project. The flame is found on the internet, but I haven't asked from where exactly. So, all in all, I'm a little reluctant to use this as the default wallpaper right now. -- ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
