[Ardour-Dev] Licensing and enforced payments

John Rigg arddev at sound-man.co.uk
Fri Jan 23 12:30:56 PST 2009

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 07:25:12PM -0000, John Emmas wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Rigg"
> >
> >Agreed. Development relies on the feedback provided by
> >people testing SVN. Charging people for providing that service
> >seems like asking an employee to pay his employer.
> >
> But only if your SVN assumption is correct.  Back at the start of this
> thread I did a rough & ready analysis of the bugs reported in December.
> Of the 70 (ish) bugs reported, a very significant proportion were one-off
> reports from people using the SAE or OS-X version.  Therefore, although
> I can't be absolutely certain (there's no way to quantify the data) it's
> very likely that these were found by users running a binary copy.  Believe
> it or not, some of the reporters were even still running Version 0.99 !!
> In fact, I only found around 8 'regular' testers (i.e. people who'd reported
> 3 bugs or more) and if paid-for SVN had been in place, no doubt all of them
> would be covered by the exemption.

John, did your analysis include bugs reported to this list but
not to Mantis? I usually report any bugs I find here, and have never used
Mantis for example.


More information about the Ardour-Dev mailing list