As I said on GitHub:
>I think we want something commonly used and recognizable to any electronic
producer. Something when you see its name, you know what it is. I've been
researching (googling) the different terms and it seems to me by the results
that Step Sequencer is the most common term for wha
"We already also call instrument track TCO's patterns so it's established
usage for us." - @diizy. No, we are clearly diverged in this matter. You
said you wanted a name for all TCO's, an umbrella term. I say OK, but we can
decide that later.
To take one thing first; renaming the Beat + Bassline.
*pardon the obvious autocorrects, my commercially purchased android phone
has a mind of its own.
--
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy
Well, RedHat does this. Some items they copyright, but the vast majority if
their stuff is open source under the covers protected by some copy left or
apache/MIT/BSD license.
See, very few people will take the time to compile it themselves... The
small (i.e.) $500/year support fee is well worth it
Yeah, by commercial I meant with copyright, cause commercial without would
practically be free.
Jonathan Aquilina wrote
> I think if we are going to commercialize this we should do like the
> blender
> foundation and start a foundation.
>
> Look at blender.org the software is still free and they
The US registrars (godaddy, 1and1, etc) I looked up don't show lmms.io
being offered at all so we may be forced to go through a particular
registrar.
If we want to avoid that, I had the realization that getlmms.com and
getlmms.org aren't taken, which is what bootstrap does (getbootstrap.com).
Sor
Soo… The discussion about changing the name came up quite often. But we
never found a name everyone agreed one so we decided to only drop the full
name.
We have one vote for .org, the rest for .io. I think it's obvious :)
Let's talk about money! lmms.io is clearly the more expensive one, but
tha
What is the status of LMMS for 14.10?
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Israel wrote:
> On 07/25/2014 05:10 AM, Vesa wrote:
> > Since the .1 version has now been released, is the corrected LMMS
> > package included in it?
> Hi Vesa,
> Unfortunately not yet. I tried e-mailing Timo again, to see
On 26 July 2014 11:56, Vesa wrote:
> I think the whole samples issue becomes moot if we first introduce the
> feature where it's possible to embed all sample data in the project
> file. Then introduce the sample library changes only after that, and the
> problem will be solved as old samples will
On 07/26/2014 01:49 PM, musikbear wrote:
> Tres Finocchiaro wrote
>> we should be mindful of how the samples impact our shipped
>> tracks, the demos that come with the software.
> and thats/ vip! /-but.. re 'we' dead sure that /none/ of the less pedigreed
> samples have been used in any shipped dem
Tres Finocchiaro wrote
> we should be mindful of how the samples impact our shipped
> tracks, the demos that come with the software.
and thats/ vip! /-but.. re 'we' dead sure that /none/ of the less pedigreed
samples have been used in any shipped demo?
Again, users will hate the devs, if
* ther
11 matches
Mail list logo
