[ardour-dev] code monkeys
markknecht at gmail.com
Fri Jan 7 18:46:58 PST 2005
On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:37:43 -0500, Taybin Rutkin <taybin at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > If this next revision is envisioned as remaining session file
> > compatible with 1.0 (I hope!) then there could also be a group of test
> > monkeys to look at that aspect. I'd be happy to volunteer for some
> > amount of work in that area.
> I don't anticipate any breakage. You never know though. There will
> definately be an upgrade path from 1.0 to 2.0 if there is breakage.
Sure. You guys are human. Thangs will get broken. You'll fix them. I
I'm more concerned about session file compatibility over the
transition from 1.0 to 2.0. Taking this other thread about ?'s in file
names as an example, if you folks go foward and make some sort of
change that the user base doesn't pick up when you make it and then
session files are somehow made non-compatible in the process then it's
a problem for people like me. Do I stay with 1.0 and keep my old
sessions OK? Do I move forward and not use them? Does 2.0 provide some
sort of conversion to bring session files up to date?
I'm thinking that none of the developers are using VFAT or maybe this
? question would have been seen by now. I haven't updated Ardour and
done any work in about a month. Did this problem show up that
recently? Will more problems somehow show up in the 2.0 conversion?
Those are my thoughts I suppose. Nothing more.
More information about the Ardour-Dev