The problem with git is its not designed to work with binary files. It is
designed for source code. What we would need is our own cloud platform,
something like own cloud which is free and open source. Again we would need
infrastructure for it
@Unfa, wasnt your friend setting something up at one p
is it lm.ms or l-m.ms? I really like the play on words so to speak.
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Tres Finocchiaro <
tres.finocchi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> l-m.ms is available :)
>
>
>
--
Jonathan Aquilina
--
Is your
l-m.ms is available :)
--
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out:
• 3 signs your SCM is hindering your productivity
• Requirements for releasing software faster
• Expert tips and advice
Nah, I kinda like it. It is implemented so that it isn't in the way for any
functionality! I would of course like B&B patterns to show some beat
patterns too when zooming in :p
Tres Finocchiaro wrote
> An alternate color would probably suffice, but the mixing of beat patterns
> and the piano roll
I am not working with samples but synths (Zynaddsubfx particularly).
The bug is that the special. 'percussive' or 'no note-off'* notes created
with B+B editor seem to be considered longer than a 32th note, maybe even a
16th note, while it is 'zero length' so it should never force the whole B+B
pat
Oeai, I was thinking about a similar concept. Uncompressed MMP files could
be edited via git or similar system, however I think it would need a very
simple, stripped down and straightforward interface to be usable for
non-tech-savvy LMMS users. I think the "get and lock" or "turn based social
creat
i was writing about a kind of github before... and it was about getting
in touch with musicians inside of lmms.
so each new push to song ( as git project) could be seen as a new
instrument and amin author could commit it or set a new branch, if he
uses this track (sound on) it means that it goes
2014-05-09 21:40 GMT+02:00 Israel :
> Also, is the wine fix (for 64bit) in this version 1.0.1 or is it in 1.0.2?
I'm not sure - simply use 1.0.2 which in order to use the latest stable version.
> Thanks!!
Thank you for your work!
Toby
--
On 05/09/2014 09:01 AM, Tobias Doerffel wrote:
> Very cool! Why do you have "-src" in the version number? Actually this
> is just a suffix in the name of our own tar ball to indicate its
> contents while the version number in Debian/Ubuntu should be 1.0.X.
>
> Toby
I am still working out how to mak
Could you specify what exactly doesn't fit your vision of LSP in what Stian
wrote? There were lost if points to addresses there.
On 5 May 2014 00:42, "Sam Duff" wrote:
>
> I heartily disagree Stian - I'd love to see a more social LSP for
everyone's benefit. The layout that I've loved the most was
I am not sure if this issue still exists, but in commandline there was no
way to specify output bit depth, so default 16 was the only option.
Quite an important lack to me personally.
--
Is your legacy SCM system holding y
Here's the stacktrace form the crash:
https://gist.github.com/tresf/96dd4d45acbf6917245d
I think the build process strips out debug symbols for LMMS. I can turn
them back on with some guidance if that helps.
-Tres
- tres.finocchi...@gmail.com
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Tres Finocchiaro
Please note that this is in regards to the crash with the GUI loading, as
the sound works fantastic, as can be observed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWPfIIaAHQg
-Tres
--
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back?
Thanks however, they run a different version than us, and their version
takes no parameters, whereas ours takes 2.
--
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out:
• 3 signs your SCM is hinder
Tres, I have no clue, but maybe you could try asking in the ZASF mailing
lists. IIRC there was even someone asking short time ago who successfully ran
ZASF on OSX.
Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 14:22:45 schrieb Tres Finocchiaro:
> So I found a bad link in the LMMS build for mac that affected ZASFX
>
So I found a bad link in the LMMS build for mac that affected ZASFX
loading, as well as a missing apple header file that the software seems to
depend on but the plugin still crashes on Apple.
Is there a way to run the plugin stand-alone to verify the instability
isn't caused by LMMS?
I've also re
I'll quote myself and also add that even though the GUI only shows a small
note, LMMS probably look at it in a different hidden way. Perhaps LMMS look
at it as a note lasting for as long as the original sample, then a GUI
solution would be to draw this in a way so that the B&B editor still looks
th
Toby was the one that made the changes.
On 9 May 2014 18:18, "Stian Jørgensrud" wrote:
> YES! Very good that someone updated it to 1.0.2 so soon, creds to that
> person!
>
> I find it very amusing that someone always find something wrong in
> everything we do correctly... No it is not for bug tes
YES! Very good that someone updated it to 1.0.2 so soon, creds to that
person!
I find it very amusing that someone always find something wrong in
everything we do correctly... No it is not for bug testing, it is an
improved 1.0.0 cause it got bug fixes. It is better than 1.0.0
musikbear wrote
>
I'm not sure what is "obvious" about this behavior, but there's no use
ranting about something that can't be changed.
Like many others, I use GitHub as a backup to my local work, so I commit
often. For those commits to appear in a pull request I did days prior is
fantastically backwards with my t
> Tres, thanks for the link. - it would perhaps be a good idear to have that
> link on the dl page as well
Theoretically our critical patches superseded the previous release. For
this reason we don't display the older versions on the main download
locations.
They're easy enough to get to though,
If you commit them to the github repo its obvious though that those newer
changes will get pulled in with the pull request. When making changes and
filing pull requests I would finish up lets say for example you got VST's
to work all that work i commit it to the local repo then the remote repo
then
The way the download works is takes you to the recent version. if you look
around on sourceforge on the lmms download page for 1.0.2 you will see
older versions listed there.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:20 PM, musikbear wrote:
> Tres, thanks for the link. - it would perhaps be a good idear to have
Tres, thanks for the link. - it would perhaps be a good idear to have that
link on the dl page as well - like 'link to earlier versions' ? -i'we give
the link to the op, and see if that helps him. I agree, there is NO reason
yet to post a win-bug. It may be his xp that is lacking something. But if
That's quite the broad assumption. The OP never stated the actual bug and
I've already responded with links to known startup crashes.
But this is all irrelevant to this email thread which states 1.0.0 is not
up for download. This statement is not true.
- tres.finocchi...@gmail.com
On Fri, May
It seems like the windows builds are crashing according to the thread in
the forums.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote:
> Bug for what?
>
> People can get it here:
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/lmms/files/lmms/1.0.0/
>
> I'm not sure what the problem is.
>
> - tres.fin
Bug for what?
People can get it here:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/lmms/files/lmms/1.0.0/
I'm not sure what the problem is.
- tres.finocchi...@gmail.com
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Jonathan Aquilina
wrote:
> Can someone file a bug in this regard linking to the forum post as you
> hav
Can someone file a bug in this regard linking to the forum post as you have
done here.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 4:14 PM, musikbear wrote:
> oki alls well then, but some has problems with it:
>
> https://sourceforge.net/apps/phpbb/lmms/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1330&sid=076a8e227a9f961c10a83a3435464a56
oki alls well then, but some has problems with it:
https://sourceforge.net/apps/phpbb/lmms/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1330&sid=076a8e227a9f961c10a83a3435464a56
Are 1.0 availabe somewhere -i cant find the subsection -'old versions'?
--
View this message in context:
http://linux-multimedia-studio-lmms
I think i speak for toby on this Israel, but thanks for all your hardwork
and eagerness to learn how to package for debian/ubuntu and all the
respective derivatives.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Tobias Doerffel
wrote:
> Very cool! Why do you have "-src" in the version number? Actually this
>
Very cool! Why do you have "-src" in the version number? Actually this
is just a suffix in the name of our own tar ball to indicate its
contents while the version number in Debian/Ubuntu should be 1.0.X.
Toby
--
Is your l
well, we are finally making a little progress here:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/utopic/+source/lmms/1.0.1-src-0ubuntu1
Utopic now has 1.0.1 so, the process to get it into Trusty can begin!
--
Regards
--
Is your legacy
It is correct. 1.0.2 had some fixes for windows specifically but to keep
everything else in line with each os all versions have been bumped to 1.0.2
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:28 PM, musikbear wrote:
> the off. dl page http://lmms.sourceforge.net/download.php points to
> 1.0.2.
> Is that correc
the off. dl page http://lmms.sourceforge.net/download.php points to 1.0.2.
Is that correct. Is 0.2 not only for bug tests?
--
View this message in context:
http://linux-multimedia-studio-lmms.996328.n3.nabble.com/1-0-is-not-up-for-download-1-0-2-is-linked-on-purpose-tp8673.html
Sent from the
34 matches
Mail list logo
