3 ms·

There is some fishy stuff going on with audacity and "muse" that nobody involved seems to be able to just say out loud simply. https://github.com/audacity/auda

There is some fishy stuff going on with audacity and "muse" that nobody involved seems to be able to just say out loud simply. https://github.com/audacity/audacity/discussions/880 https://github.com/audacity/audacity/discussions/880 Personally I would rather use closed source reaper or an audicity fork than deal with whatever is going on with audacity. Everyone involved seems to have been sworn to secrecy which generally tells me it's not in my best interest to get involved and pit myself in a position where this conspiracy has any influence over me.

jraph 5y ago
Can you point out the problems shown by this discussion? Because I can't. The concerns are legitimate but let's give Muse some time to answer properly. I haven't seen anything shady… other than the initial telemetry thing that has been widely fixed. The community has been listened, I see this as an actually very positive thing for Muse. I'm very happy to see private companies take care of open source projects (if they do it properly, obviously)
- Jiejeing 5y ago
  The history of musescore is not really the brightest, which may explain why people do not trust them much ([0] and discussion). Yes, they shelved telemetry and listened to the community, which is good, but they still proposed an intrusive change without discussion and only turned back because the outrage was big enough. [0] https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5#issue-562094186 https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5#issu...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- LegitShady 5y ago
  >he concerns are legitimate but let's give Muse some time to answer properly. It's 6 days old, and they have some responses in the discussion but nothing that clarifies what was going on. It appears to be heavily NDA'd. Musescore has done some interesting things https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5 https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5
franga2000 5y ago
A bit off-topic, but in all the posts surrounding Muse Group acquiring Audacity, including the one you linked, I never understood why people keep saying things like "what does it even mean for a company to acquire a FOSS project?" or "a company can't acquire anything other than the trademark". Well of course they can acquire a project. To acquire the project doesn't just mean the trademarked name, but also the rights to call their version the official version, the official website to distribute their builds on, "BDFL" status including write access to the canonical VCS repository and the right to accept or reject pull requests (unless, of course, the project doesn't have different governance policies in place). They might also acquire the right to the previous owner's source code, which means that they could (assuming they re-wrote all the other parts that were written by other contributors) dual-license the project (without violating the GPL).
- LegitShady 5y ago
  They should outright state what they bought, who they are, what their plans are, etc. As of now, it's fishy. Uncertain. They should just state outright what's happening and why. https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5 https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5 Here is some interesting activity by musescore threatening another developer over things musescore didn't have any rights over. I dont trust them. They don't act like people worthy of trust.
  - mmastrac 5y ago
    I am also curious about this. The attitude in both of these cases suggests to me there's a either a cultural or leadership issue at the company.
- denotational 5y ago
  > but also the rights to call their version the official version I'm not entirely sure what this really means beyond the protections already afforded by the trademark.
- throwaway2037 5y ago
  This is one of the key open source strategies used by Red Hat, Microsoft, Intel, Google, etc. I am not implying anything nefarious here. (Cygwin, a product of Red Hat, specifically advertises on their commercial license page how many core contributors for various open source projects work for Red Hat. This allows them to quickly fix bugs for major customers.) In short, if there is a very important open source project, you hire a lead developer from the project who has commit access to the main repo.
spacechild1 5y ago
The Muse Group website doesn't even have an impressum: https://mu.se/ https://mu.se/ Some comments on the GitHub thread claim that it's actually a Cypriot shell company. Having read a bit about the situation with MuseScore, it looks rather shady...

jraph 5y ago

Can you point out the problems shown by this discussion? Because I can't. The concerns are legitimate but let's give Muse some time to answer properly. I haven't seen anything shady… other than the initial telemetry thing that has been widely fixed. The community has been listened, I see this as an actually very positive thing for Muse. I'm very happy to see private companies take care of open source projects (if they do it properly, obviously)

Jiejeing 5y ago
The history of musescore is not really the brightest, which may explain why people do not trust them much ([0] and discussion). Yes, they shelved telemetry and listened to the community, which is good, but they still proposed an intrusive change without discussion and only turned back because the outrage was big enough. [0] https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5#issue-562094186 https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5#issu...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
LegitShady 5y ago
>he concerns are legitimate but let's give Muse some time to answer properly. It's 6 days old, and they have some responses in the discussion but nothing that clarifies what was going on. It appears to be heavily NDA'd. Musescore has done some interesting things https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5 https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5

franga2000 5y ago

A bit off-topic, but in all the posts surrounding Muse Group acquiring Audacity, including the one you linked, I never understood why people keep saying things like "what does it even mean for a company to acquire a FOSS project?" or "a company can't acquire anything other than the trademark". Well of course they can acquire a project. To acquire the project doesn't just mean the trademarked name, but also the rights to call their version the official version, the official website to distribute their builds on, "BDFL" status including write access to the canonical VCS repository and the right to accept or reject pull requests (unless, of course, the project doesn't have different governance policies in place). They might also acquire the right to the previous owner's source code, which means that they could (assuming they re-wrote all the other parts that were written by other contributors) dual-license the project (without violating the GPL).

LegitShady 5y ago
They should outright state what they bought, who they are, what their plans are, etc. As of now, it's fishy. Uncertain. They should just state outright what's happening and why. https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5 https://github.com/Xmader/musescore-downloader/issues/5 Here is some interesting activity by musescore threatening another developer over things musescore didn't have any rights over. I dont trust them. They don't act like people worthy of trust.
- mmastrac 5y ago
  I am also curious about this. The attitude in both of these cases suggests to me there's a either a cultural or leadership issue at the company.
denotational 5y ago
> but also the rights to call their version the official version I'm not entirely sure what this really means beyond the protections already afforded by the trademark.
throwaway2037 5y ago
This is one of the key open source strategies used by Red Hat, Microsoft, Intel, Google, etc. I am not implying anything nefarious here. (Cygwin, a product of Red Hat, specifically advertises on their commercial license page how many core contributors for various open source projects work for Red Hat. This allows them to quickly fix bugs for major customers.) In short, if there is a very important open source project, you hire a lead developer from the project who has commit access to the main repo.

spacechild1 5y ago

The Muse Group website doesn't even have an impressum: https://mu.se/ https://mu.se/ Some comments on the GitHub thread claim that it's actually a Cypriot shell company. Having read a bit about the situation with MuseScore, it looks rather shady...