On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 04:54 +0200, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
Bob Ham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 21:11 +0200, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
Bob Ham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
More generally, LASH isn't a frontend for JACK.
What about the jack watchdog? What does get killed
Am Mittwoch, 23. Januar 2008 schrieb Frank Barknecht:
Arnold Krille hat gesagt: // Arnold Krille wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 23. Januar 2008 schrieb Darren Landrum:
Okay, I'll see if I can make up for my awful post from before with a
constructive question.
If you wanted to quickly prototype an
If you wanted to quickly prototype an idea for a DSP routine, how would
you go about it? It would need to work in real-time, but it wouldn't
really need to be super-efficient for testing ideas.
Since everyone else is having a go, I guess this is the thread to
mention Chuck...
Benno Senoner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
after all we share all the same goal of better and free tools to
make music
I'm confused, because this is not true. Your software, LinuxSampler,
is not free software. You've also refused to participate in all the
threads we've got on this list about your
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 04:02:29PM +0100, Esben Stien wrote:
Benno Senoner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
after all we share all the same goal of better and free tools to
make music
I'm confused, because this is not true. Your software, LinuxSampler,
is not free software. You've also
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 21:15 +0100, Esben Stien wrote:
I'm glad that GPLv3 fixes this issue, cause if you state that the
software is under GPLv3 you may not impose any further restrictions on
the work, if I read the license correctly.
You read it wrong. For two different reasons. First, the
Paul Davis wrote:
You read it wrong. For two different reasons. First, the same mistake
than Arnold made earlier. The GPL (whatever version) is the text that
lays out the terms of a license. Anyone can refer to this text but then
add exceptions, extensions. I can even say Its licensed under
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 21:15 +0100, Esben Stien wrote:
alex stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
we just want to avoid somebody to directly make money with our work,
that is by selling our software in a sampler product like a sampler
+ sample library bundle, a hardware sampler or something
Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 20:15:35 schrieb Esben Stien:
But that's really the funny thing here. Your software isn't from the
free/open source software communities. It doesn't conform to neither
the free software definition nor the open source definition.
Wrong:
Frank Barknecht wrote:
Another very new contender is Vessel, a (micro)sound synthesis
package for Lua:
http://www.mat.ucsb.edu/%7Ewakefield/lua%7E/lua%7E.htm
http://www.mat.ucsb.edu/%7Ewakefield/lua%7E/Wakefield_MSThesis_MAT07_Vessel.pdf
Looks like that thesis was done at CREATE (UCSB).
Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 schrieb Krzysztof Foltman:
Paul Davis wrote:
You read it wrong. For two different reasons. First, the same mistake
than Arnold made earlier. The GPL (whatever version) is the text that
lays out the terms of a license. Anyone can refer to this text but then
On Jan 24, 2008 1:06 PM, Steve Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, you're confusing JACK Demolition, with Demolition. Demolition is a
LADSPA host for testing plugins, JACK Demolition is a JACK client for
testing other JACK clients. Nick wrote Demolition, and I wrote JACK
Demolition, inspired
Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 23:08:05 schrieben Sie:
When people talk about free software and open source, it goes really
without saying that they talk about free software as defined by the
FSF and open source as defined by the open source initiative, but
obviously not in your case.
You
13 matches
Mail list logo
