| Michael,
Absolutely looking forward to more new music from you. Your stuff is
wonderful. And more new music from John ffitch, Gabriel Maldonado, Anthony
and *all* the developers.
Since there are *2 versions* currently, I am just wanting to make sure that
as many aspects of the heavily used Csound4 stuff has as much common opcodes
as it can and that are easy to add - if they sources are shared by those who
wrote and tested them in their versions.
Rick
on 2/17/05 10:17 AM, gogins@pipeline.com at gogins@pipeline.com wrote:
> With all due respect, this is a really bad idea. It would create 2 widely
> used but different versions of Csound, each requiring significant
> maintenance work.
>
> Csound has suffered, I think, more than most people realize by having
> several slightly but critically divergent code bases. Nobody worries about
> which version of PD or SuperCollider they are running.
>
> Speaking as a developer and a composer, I have done it both ways. I used to
> maintain CsoundVST as a separate project, now I maintain it as a frontend
> and extensions within the canonical version.
>
> Since I moved into the canonical CVS I have saved, I am sure, dozens if not
> hundreds of hours a year of my PRECIOUS FREAKING TIME.
>
> PRECIOUS FREAKING TIME THAT I SHOULD BE SPENDING MAKING MUSIC!
>
> MUSIC!
>
> MUSIC!
>
> Get it?
>
> For those who are not composers but do work on Csound development, merely
> substitute DOING NEW DEVELOPMENT for MAKING MUSIC in the above.
>
> I imagine that other maintainers of divergent versions would experience the
> same thing... if they ever merged back into the canonical tree.
>
> Of course, for some of them, this would require a lot of work, and I can
> understand that reluctance!...
>
> People, please, get it together and, instead of improving the old csound,
> get the new one up to speed. It already has more features. For
> non-real-time work, it is already significantly more musically useful than
> the old version. Thanks to Istvan's work, it now even RUNS FASTER than the
> old version!
>
> All it needs is some refinement and there will be no question which is the
> version to use.
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Anthony Kozar anthony.kozar@utoledo.edu
> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:08:10 -0500
> To: csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, rboulanger@csounds.com
> Subject: [Cs-dev] Re: ending the code freeze
>
>
> While I have resisted the notion of ending the code freeze both publicly and
> privately, I think that when the call comes from one of the veritable
> leaders of our community that perhaps the dev team should give the request
> some serious consideration.
>
> Here are some of my thoughts on the idea.
>
> Disadvantages of unfreezing:
>
> * It will delay Csound 5 even more both by creating more changes to "port"
> from Cs4 and by possibly diverting resources.
> * New bugs may be introduced even if we are extremely careful.
> * ??? (The first reason is huge).
>
> Advantages:
>
> * Increased compatibility between the most used versions of Csound 4.
> * New toys for everyone to appease their appetites until Cs5 arrives.
> * Comparing code between divergent versions will likely help us fix more
> bugs.
> * Cs4 may be a better test bed for resolving differences than Cs5.
> * Some features already added have never worked correctly in canonical but
> they do in other versions. We could correct this.
> (6)
>
> I think that the truth is that Csound 5 is still a LONG way off. And we
> should take the time to do it right.
>
> We would not have to completely thaw Csound 4. We could put limitations on
> the types of changes that could be made. (Only "stable" new opcodes or GEN
> routines that do not change the engine. Or additionally, changes that fix
> features that were partially added to Cs4 (1) or minor additions (2) should
> be allowed, but not major new features or functionality changes). And we
> should probably have very strict standards for testing changes so that we
> don't break anything else. (A test suite of scores and orchestras that
> demonstrate not only allowed syntax but disallowed syntax would be very
> helpful anyways). (3)
>
> I also think that there are two or three developers who already spend most
> of their time on Csound 4 anyways (myself included). I would be willing to
> run diffs between AV, MacCsound, and CVS myself in order to identify those
> pieces of code which could be assimilated. It would be up to the developers
> of these versions to make sure that they include the CVS changes when
> possible. Those developers focused on Csound 5 the most (John, Michael,
> Steven) probably would not have to worry about releasing new versions of Cs4
> since this is primarily done by John R, Matt, Gab, and myself now anyways.
> (4)
>
> On the other hand, I think many of the most noticeable differences (such as
> missing opcodes) can be solved already in Csound 4 by using opcode
> libraries. If Gab and Matt would make sure that the plugin mechanism works
> in their versions, then we could get the opcode lists pretty close (ignoring
> things like OpenGL, etc). (5) (And I am grateful to Matt for already looking
> into this). However, the macro example attached by Dr. B to this thread
> would not have a prayer of working anywhere but on CsoundAV under this
> scenario.
>
> I see advantages to both paths, but I will follow the team on this. I hope
> that everyone will contribute to the discussion and I hope that we can
> arrive at a consensus about how to proceed. In the end though, I think that
> we should look to John ffitch to make the final decision on this matter.
>
> Thanks for reading my babbling ...
>
> Anthony
>
> (1) Like multi-line strings {{ }} and score repeats using { }.
> (2) Like the R and T score operators from Gab.
> (3) I have already started to make a set of scores for demonstrating both
> bugs and fixed bugs.
> (4) Any developers I haven't mentioned is not due to oversight as much as
> that I am unclear exactly what projects they are currently working on.
> (5) Opcode plugins should already work in canonical 4.23, 4.23 GBS, Mills
> 4.23f12, Istvan's 4.24, and CsoundVST, I think.
> (6) And we could increment the version to 4.25 because I get so dizzy with
> the current versioning scheme ;) (4.23f12gbs.8, 4.24.1, etc.)
>
>
> On 2/7/05 8:05 PM, Dr. Richard Boulanger etched in
> stone:
>
>> I think that the "opcode freeze" was a great idea and that this has given
>> developers a good amount of time to learn to work together and solve many
> of
>> the huge, fundamental, core restructuring issues of Csound - hopefully
>> leading to an incredibly functional and transparent, powerful, and
> adaptable
>> Csound5 in the future,
>>
>> but... There has still be a lot of cooking going on in a number of
> wonderful
>> kitchens around the world - While we wait for the Thanksgiving feast of
>> Csound5, can't we share some of the breadcrumbs and leftovers from all the
>> cool proprietary stuff that has been added to Csound4 with the composers,
>> teachers, sound designers? Hope that you and other developers could
>> encourage this.
>>
>> - Dr. B.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
_______________________________________________________________________
+ Dr. Richard Boulanger, Professor
+ Music Synthesis Department, Berklee College of Music
+ 1140 Boylston Street - Boston, MA 02215-3693
+ Office Phone: (617) 747-2485 Office Fax: (617) 747-2564
+ eMail: rboulanger@csounds.com or rboulanger@berklee.edu
+ WebPage: http://csounds.com/boulanger/
________________________________________________________________________
+ Almost Everything Csound @ http://csounds.com/
+ The Csound Catalog with Audio @ http://csounds.com/catalog/
+ The Csound Book @ http://csounds.com/book/
+ The Csound Magazine @ http://csounds.com/ezine/
+ CsoundForums @ http://csounds.com/phpBB2/
________________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net |