[Ardour-Users] Ardour 2.8 released

[Fernando Lopez-Lezcano]

On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 16:40 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> Linux Packagers: please do not call such
> packages "Ardour". They should always be named in a way to make it
> clear that they contain VST support - Ardour with VST support is not
> actually a Linux program at all (its a small Windows executable that
> is linked against some Linux libraries, run by a shell script that
> invokes Wine). It is critical that users have the choice to install 1
> or the other (or both, if possible). To repeat, Ardour with VST
> support should not be packaged as "Ardour". I suggest "ArdourVST" (or
> ardourvst, for the case-insensitive). 

Will probably be ardour-vst in Planet CCRMA...

I imagine it would be able to use all the other auxiliary files from the
main package, right? So the ardour-vst package would only have an
executable binary (/usr/bin/ardour-vst) and would require the main
package. 

-- Fernando