Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info

Date	2008-03-23 19:49
From	victor
Subject	Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info
	OK what we need is a better release schedule. Let's try to do it next time. Victor ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Yi" To: "Developer discussions" Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info >I can see Victor's point, the current installer does have issues, but > I'm thinking more along the lines with Rory that the amount of time > for testing on Windows was a lot less than other platforms. I think > it would be good to at least give it another try, perhaps with a > better definition of timeline and expectations, i.e. beta on this > date, release on date one week later if no bugs, only changes between > beta and release are fixes, etc. Perhaps emphasizing the importance > of beta testing more to users as a means for them to help participate > in improving the quality of the software might be of benefit too. > > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Rory Walsh wrote: >> > But the Windows binary installers had as many issues in the >> > final release as they had in other releases. That is why I said >> > I did not see any gains... >> >> All the other beta releases were made long before the windows ones which >> left windows users with little time to check anything. >> >> Rory. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > Victor >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Steven Yi" >> > To: "Developer discussions" >> > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:08 PM >> > Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info >> > >> > >> >> Again, I disagree, and feel the release process was compromised by >> the >> >> lag time in the windows release coming out weeks after the other >> >> platforms. There's good reasons why people use public beta's and >> it's >> >> not like we have a different circumstance than other software >> >> developers and their software. It may seem like more instant >> >> satisfaction to just put a change in and release it, but we've had >> too >> >> many releases where new bugs are coming up and they're things that >> >> could have gotten cleared up with a particular phase dedicated to >> >> testing the new features work and that there aren't new bugs >> >> introduced. >> >> >> >> I'm afraid we'll just digress back into releasing things in >> >> half-tested fashion and go back to people saying "I'm new to CSound >> >> and tried installing release xxx and x, y, and z didn't work" because >> >> the primary developer on that platform didn't try out using those >> >> features because they never use them. >> >> >> >> If the beta was released on all platforms at the same time, I really >> >> don't think we'd have had the lag we had. We'd also be getting users >> >> testing on all platforms at the same time. >> >> >> >> steven >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Dr. Richard Boulanger >> >> wrote: >> >>> I completely agree with you Victor. >> >>> Releasing the betas was a waste of time and put the release on >> hold - >> >>> a terribly long hold. >> >>> >> >>> We are ready now for 5.09. >> >>> >> >>> There are many significant fixes and new opcodes that have come >> into >> >>> the CVS since the release of the beta. >> >>> I hope you will just release 5.09 next time - and not stall the >> >>> release like we did. >> >>> It was a nice experiment, but... also not necessary. >> >>> >> >>> Hopefully we can move forward like we used to. >> >>> >> >>> Worth trying, but not much gained. >> >>> >> >>> And mostly time lost. >> >>> >> >>> my 2c >> >>> >> >>> -dB >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Mar 20, 2008, at 3:48 AM, victor wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > I wasn't aware. Which ones? I seem to recall these >> >>> > were in the beta release notes already: >> >>> > >> >>> > pan2: Corrected so it agrees with documentation >> >>> > hilbert had its outputs reversed, now correct. >> >>> > works again according to the manual. >> >>> > Fixes in the { and } score looping statements. >> >>> > >> >>> > Besides, bug fixes should have waited for 5.09, really, as >> >>> > the beta was there for package and binary testing. >> >>> > The CsoundAC changes should not really have been made, >> >>> > as there should not have been this type of change between >> >>> > beta and full release. >> >>> > >> >>> > And if you want my opinion, releasing a beta was a waste of time, >> >>> > as the full release seems to still have problems, just as much as >> >>> > before. >> >>> > >> >>> > Victor >> >>> > >> >>> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> > From: "Anthony Kozar" >> >>> > To: "Developer discussions" >> >>> > Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:24 AM >> >>> > Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> There were several bug fixes in between the beta and the final >> >>> >> releases. >> >>> >> Some of them might be considered significant. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Anthony >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Wed, March 19, 2008 9:51 pm, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >>> On Wednesday 19 March 2008 22:35:45 victor wrote: >> >>> >>>> They are not betas, but full releases. Since I am away from >> >>> >>>> work, I cannot build new packages, so I just renamed the >> >>> >>>> old ones, which were OK anyway. They might carry the library >> >>> >>>> beta string message, but otherwise are undistinguishable from >> >>> >>>> the non-beta 5.08. I might build new packages to comply >> >>> >>>> later. For now, they should be fine. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> It is not the same. At least, the csoundac library is no longer >> >>> >>> shared. I >> >>> >>> don't know if it is used in the OSX installers, but it's >> >>> >>> certainly not >> >>> >>> exactly the same as the betas. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> >> ---- >> >>> >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> >>> >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> >>> >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> >>> >> Csound-devel mailing list >> >>> >> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> >>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> > --- >> >>> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> >>> > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> >>> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> >>> > _______________________________________________ >> >>> > Csound-devel mailing list >> >>> > Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Csound-devel mailing list >> >>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Csound-devel mailing list >> >> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Csound-devel mailing list >> > Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >> > >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Csound-devel mailing list >> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Csound-devel mailing list > Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Csound-devel mailing list Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Date	2008-03-23 22:44
From	"Dr. Richard Boulanger"
Subject	Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info
	A better release schedule - tighter - time to test (one week or so) and then go.. would make more sense... also now that DavidW is working on a clearer set of build instructions for all platforms from CVS and we are getting those build processes better - for all platforms - and scons straightened out - it won't be such an issue. my extra 5c..... on the mac - it is AMAZINGLY wonderful that victor builds binary packages that just install and work. we need that for WIndows again! - We used to have this in the past. I do workshops all over - and NO ONE seems to be able to get Csound to just run on windows.... (beginners that is.... - it may run, if you know what you are doing.... but... the goal needs to be - that novices can install things, test things, (a test synth orchestra, a test sample processing orc etc might be nice to include as well... we include a lot of things... if you are expert enough to know where to find them and how to run them... might be nice to include something simpler - build in a default.... test.csd -dB On Mar 23, 2008, at 3:49 PM, victor wrote: > OK what we need is a better release schedule. Let's try to > do it next time. > > Victor > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven Yi" > To: "Developer discussions" > Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 7:30 PM > Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info > > >> I can see Victor's point, the current installer does have issues, but >> I'm thinking more along the lines with Rory that the amount of time >> for testing on Windows was a lot less than other platforms. I think >> it would be good to at least give it another try, perhaps with a >> better definition of timeline and expectations, i.e. beta on this >> date, release on date one week later if no bugs, only changes between >> beta and release are fixes, etc. Perhaps emphasizing the importance >> of beta testing more to users as a means for them to help participate >> in improving the quality of the software might be of benefit too. >> >> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Rory Walsh >> wrote: >>>> But the Windows binary installers had as many issues in the >>>> final release as they had in other releases. That is why I said >>>> I did not see any gains... >>> >>> All the other beta releases were made long before the windows >>> ones which >>> left windows users with little time to check anything. >>> >>> Rory. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Victor >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Steven Yi" >>>> To: "Developer discussions" >>>> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:08 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info >>>> >>>> >>>>> Again, I disagree, and feel the release process was compromised by >>> the >>>>> lag time in the windows release coming out weeks after the other >>>>> platforms. There's good reasons why people use public beta's and >>> it's >>>>> not like we have a different circumstance than other software >>>>> developers and their software. It may seem like more instant >>>>> satisfaction to just put a change in and release it, but we've had >>> too >>>>> many releases where new bugs are coming up and they're things that >>>>> could have gotten cleared up with a particular phase dedicated to >>>>> testing the new features work and that there aren't new bugs >>>>> introduced. >>>>> >>>>> I'm afraid we'll just digress back into releasing things in >>>>> half-tested fashion and go back to people saying "I'm new to >>>>> CSound >>>>> and tried installing release xxx and x, y, and z didn't work" >>>>> because >>>>> the primary developer on that platform didn't try out using those >>>>> features because they never use them. >>>>> >>>>> If the beta was released on all platforms at the same time, I >>>>> really >>>>> don't think we'd have had the lag we had. We'd also be getting >>>>> users >>>>> testing on all platforms at the same time. >>>>> >>>>> steven >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Dr. Richard Boulanger >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> I completely agree with you Victor. >>>>>> Releasing the betas was a waste of time and put the release on >>> hold - >>>>>> a terribly long hold. >>>>>> >>>>>> We are ready now for 5.09. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are many significant fixes and new opcodes that have come >>> into >>>>>> the CVS since the release of the beta. >>>>>> I hope you will just release 5.09 next time - and not stall the >>>>>> release like we did. >>>>>> It was a nice experiment, but... also not necessary. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully we can move forward like we used to. >>>>>> >>>>>> Worth trying, but not much gained. >>>>>> >>>>>> And mostly time lost. >>>>>> >>>>>> my 2c >>>>>> >>>>>> -dB >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 20, 2008, at 3:48 AM, victor wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I wasn't aware. Which ones? I seem to recall these >>>>>>> were in the beta release notes already: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> pan2: Corrected so it agrees with documentation >>>>>>> hilbert had its outputs reversed, now correct. >>>>>>> works again according to the manual. >>>>>>> Fixes in the { and } score looping statements. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Besides, bug fixes should have waited for 5.09, really, as >>>>>>> the beta was there for package and binary testing. >>>>>>> The CsoundAC changes should not really have been made, >>>>>>> as there should not have been this type of change between >>>>>>> beta and full release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And if you want my opinion, releasing a beta was a waste of >>>>>>> time, >>>>>>> as the full release seems to still have problems, just as >>>>>>> much as >>>>>>> before. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Victor >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: "Anthony Kozar" >>>>>>> To: "Developer discussions" >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:24 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There were several bug fixes in between the beta and the final >>>>>>>> releases. >>>>>>>> Some of them might be considered significant. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anthony >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, March 19, 2008 9:51 pm, Felipe Sateler wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday 19 March 2008 22:35:45 victor wrote: >>>>>>>>>> They are not betas, but full releases. Since I am away from >>>>>>>>>> work, I cannot build new packages, so I just renamed the >>>>>>>>>> old ones, which were OK anyway. They might carry the library >>>>>>>>>> beta string message, but otherwise are undistinguishable from >>>>>>>>>> the non-beta 5.08. I might build new packages to comply >>>>>>>>>> later. For now, they should be fine. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It is not the same. At least, the csoundac library is no >>>>>>>>> longer >>>>>>>>> shared. I >>>>>>>>> don't know if it is used in the OSX installers, but it's >>>>>>>>> certainly not >>>>>>>>> exactly the same as the betas. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> --- >>>>>>>> ---- >>>>>>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>>>>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>>>>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Csound-devel mailing list >>>>>>>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> --- >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>>>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>>>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Csound-devel mailing list >>>>>>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> -------- >>>>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Csound-devel mailing list >>>>>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> ------- >>>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Csound-devel mailing list >>>>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ------ >>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Csound-devel mailing list >>>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ----- >>> >>> >>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Csound-devel mailing list >>> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---- >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Csound-devel mailing list >> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Csound-devel mailing list > Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Csound-devel mailing list Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Date	2008-03-23 23:13
From	DavidW
Subject	Re: [Cs-dev] sourceforge Downloads info
	Whilst there is obviously redundancy in factoring the build process by platform in the manual, it does make clear how much easier it is for the DIY (novice) builder on *nix. Perhaps it is possible to provide Windows builders with a half-way toolset? Maybe it already happens; I don't build on Windows. D. On 24/03/2008, at 9:44 AM, Dr. Richard Boulanger wrote: > A better release schedule - tighter - time to test (one week or so) > and then go.. > would make more sense... also now that DavidW is working on a clearer > set of > build instructions for all platforms from CVS and we are getting > those build processes > better - for all platforms - and scons straightened out - it won't be > such an issue. > > my extra 5c..... > > on the mac - it is AMAZINGLY wonderful that victor builds binary > packages that just install and work. > we need that for WIndows again! - We used to have this in the > past. I do workshops all over - and > NO ONE seems to be able to get Csound to just run on windows.... > (beginners that is.... - it may run, > if you know what you are doing.... but... the goal needs to be - that > novices can install things, test things, > (a test synth orchestra, a test sample processing orc etc might be > nice to include as well... we include a lot > of things... if you are expert enough to know where to find them and > how to run them... might be nice to > include something simpler - build in a default.... test.csd > > -dB > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Csound-devel mailing list Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Date	2008-04-18 18:44
From	Anthony Kozar
Subject	Re: [Cs-dev] "tool sets" for building Csound
	DavidW wrote on 3/23/08 7:13 PM: > Whilst there is obviously redundancy in factoring the build process by > platform in the manual, it does make clear how much easier it is for > the DIY (novice) builder on *nix. Perhaps it is possible to provide > Windows builders with a half-way toolset? Maybe it already happens; I > don't build on Windows. > D. Sorry to reply to this so late ... I wanted to say that this is largely what I do for Mac OS 9. In the Csound source package for OS 9, you will find pre-compiled libraries with source and IDE projects for most of the library dependencies that are needed to rebuild the OS 9 binary distribution. Thus, someone interested in recompiling just Csound does not have to download, configure, and recompile libsndfile, libpng, zlib, Loris, FFTW, etc. (1) The only major thing that I do not include is Python because of its size. (2) Since Windows is in a similar boat to OS 9 for open-source libraries (even the common ones like zlib are not included with the OS), a separate package containing pre-compiled versions of all of the dependencies with source code set up for easy compilation of Csound would seem very helpful to me. This package should hardly ever need to be updated if its maintainer is not too zealous about updating individual libraries. (I have been using the same versions of libsndfile and other libraries since Csound 5 was released). Sure, this is more work for the already over-worked Csound packagers, but it would hopefully not be too much (escpecially if the dependency package is only updated once every year or so). Anthony (1) The main reason I include these is that my understanding of the LGPL and GPL licenses is that offering the source code for download is required if we are distributing library binaries that we compiled ourselves. (2) Python also has a simple installer and does not need to be compiled. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Csound-devel mailing list Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net