Re: [LAU] [Zynaddsubfx-user] zyn and the art of software maintenance

Folderol wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
> Here be dragons!
>
> While I would agree in general that a log scale would be better, both
> from a usability point of view, and consistency with the rest, how is
> this going to effect existing patches?
>
> I have a *lot* of patches. Apart from Paul's default set, I've gathered
> over a hundred from other people as well as creating about the same
> number myself - I would be less than delighted if these all started to
> misbehave!
>
> I would be happy with apparent log behaviour without changing the
> software's interpretation of the actual stored numbers, although this
> might give a rather strange 'feel'. It would depend on how fine-grained
> the actual numbers were.
>
> The only other practical possibility I can think of would be build
> in a parameter file conversion utility (I think this was done in Zyn's
> early days) and put an ID tag in new files (this was not done!) so that
> appropriate loading behaviour could be done.
>
> To go this way would also need agreement with the main Zyn branch
> otherwise we'd end up with two incompatible systems.
>
> All in all, I wonder if it would bring enough benefits to be actually
> worth the effort.

Thanks, I think that closely parallels my own fears, dreads and reservations.
End of story.

cheers,

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sun Sep 20 04:15:04 2009