Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] Quasimodo (Was: Re: LADSPA GUI)
From: MOULET Xavier CNET/DMR/ISS (xavier.moulet_AT_cnet.francetelecom.fr)
Date: pe maalis 10 2000 - 10:37:26 EST
Hi,
> I hope that this is not true of Quasimodo. In that case, what is
> holding me back is (1) work on other projects (the RME Hammerfall
> driver, ardour, softwerk-on-gtk ...) (2) dilemmas about a better
> language to support for the modules than Csound's orchestra language
> (3)
May I suggest python bindings (strong OOP commitment, simple C/C++ wraps,
gtk frontend, ...) ? (I thought there was a thread about that kind of
musical languages here but I don't remember what emerged - if anything).
> the need for some better graphics and people to write/improve the
> modules that we have now (about 70 in some form or another)
It would be fine if you would setup a Quasimodo theme micro howto to let
people make themes for quasimodo, as they already exist. I would like to
contibute pixmaps, as I already did in early quasimodo stages (unfortunately
they were not choosen).
(4) the
> fact that its a cutting edge system that is hard for other people to
> compile who are not weathered programmers and understand how to work
> with its myriad of library dependencies.
>
Definitely. People just would like to :
rpm -ivh Quasimodo.i386.rpm
quasimodo
but good .specs files may be tedious to write.
> I would like to think that if a half-dozen people started working on
> modules for Quasimodo, and 2 people on some kickass pixmaps, it would
> be a compelling studio-ready system in 2-3 months.
Sure, but by the way, what CPU power is "suitable" for a minimal use of
quasimodo (just a few modules necessary to make a basic song) ?
bye,
xavier
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : su maalis 12 2000 - 09:14:06 EST