I'm going to sound fairly ruthless here, but i got into UBstudio at Gutsy, and apart from the graphics adventure we all seem to have at one point or another, the install was ok, and lean. I'd definitely side with Susan here and dump pulseaudio. That's an extra challenge in a dedicated audio/video distro that we don't need. One only has to trawl through the mailing list to see how many times this came up, and for what? So users could have skype/rthymbox/etc?
It seems that Ubstudio has tried to be all things to all users, and as i understand it, we have Ubuntu generic for that. Perhaps the reverse should be true. Build a really lean, dedicated audio/video distro, and let the user draw from that specialist repo, over the top of a generic ubuntu base. It's up to them if they face challenges with pulseaudio/jack/etc..., as a result, and they can sort it out with the main ubuntu team. I don't know what the regulations are for building with Ubuntu, nor how far you can step forward into a state of the art distro, in terms of developed apps, but i get the impression that it's an uphill battle to include recent versions of apps, because of the 'greater good' of Ubuntu in general. (and no criticism intended here.) And perhaps the question you ask Cory is the valid of all. What do we actually want in a dedicated audio/video distro? Scott made a good point, imho, about jack. In the current linux audio world, jack lies at the heart. It's ability to bring together multi app setups so effectively puts it above anything else we could expect to use. As an orchestral writer it has the elements that are missing from other OS's, who frankly should have built their sound systems in the 'jack' way in the first place. (multiple unlimited audio/midi ports, etc..) It's what we have, and it does it's job very well indeed. (imho) I will admit i got kinda irritated the day it was announced that pulse would be included in ubuntu by default. It felt like the concept of a professionally useable distro was playing second fiddle to a domestic user requirement, something they already had in ubuntu main anyway. I still don't see the reasoning behind this, and i think the inclusion of pulse has only contributed problems, not solved any. If devs are ok with coding with Jack/Alsa, and nearly all of our useable apps are Jackable now, with an option to route OSS and ALSA apps through Jack with efficient plugins, and the mighty .asoundrc option, then there's little need for anything else. We have to draw the line somewhere, and although there will always be those who don't like it, they do have other options, with a bit of elbow grease on their part. Can't please everyone, and i think UBS has tried to do that, to it's detriment. (And no offence to the UBS team. I think they've done a great job, under a lot of pressure.) Can i respectfully suggest the UBS project gets back to basics, which is something it did really well? Great kernel for realtime use. Minimal set of requirements to run the OS itself. Up to date audio and video apps. No games, no pulse, no extra players, utilities, skype, or anything else that isn't absolutely essential to a dedicated audio/video distro for making music and images. Give the user the option to include what they want from main repos, but refer them to the main repos if something goes wrong with their "extras". In these halycon days of multiboot, cross-platform options, UBS doesn't have to include all the rest of the crap. It can stick with excellence, and performance, and let the user reboot if he or she wants something outside of a pure DAW environment. I sound a bit hard here, but from my perspective, it seems to make sense to re-evaluate to a less complicated level. Users have other options. 2 roubles worth, and a big thank you to the UBS team for all their hard work, and determination. UBS was my first distro, and as a composer and musician, it got me going in Linux, and helped me realise just how many options, and great tools, we have. I've become a 'source install junkie' since then, but i don't forget where all this started. Alex. On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Cory K. <coryis...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > Scott wrote: >> I think those questions would have been quickly answered if UBS was more >> focused on >> being a trim distro in the spirit of a dedicated DAW instead of incorporating >> everything from Ubuntu-desktop >> > > We've never done that. Matter of fact, we take out quite a bit. Do a > clean install without the metas and you see just how sparse it is > compared to Ubuntu. (be sure we'll get crap for not having the new > notification setup) Where issues come in is supporting apps that don't > use JACK. *Regardless* of if its a audio/video/graphics app. > > And *part* of that increased focus was due to the fact that to include > the audio apps people wanted put us over 700MB /anyway/. So, why not > expand a bit? I feel including Video and Graphic apps were great for > their promotion. > > > So yes. 1 idea is to flush it all and focus on JACK. But note, it's just > an idea and the future will be crafted by those involved. > > > -COry K. > > > -- > Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list > Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users > -- Parchment Studios (It started as a joke...) -- Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
