3 ms·

The full pull request history for non is available on the Internet Archive. The only one I could find from Filipe is this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20201

The full pull request history for non is available on the Internet Archive. The only one I could find from Filipe is this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20201122235832/https://github.com/original-male/non/pull/146 https://web.archive.org/web/20201122235832/https://github.co... I'm not seeing any insults in there, just a detailed explanation from Jonathan for why he didn't want to merge it. I don't understand the full technical details, but it's clear he gave it a lot of thought and there was a difference in project philosophy.

ncann 5y ago
Yeah, although if I read the thread right his first comment was also 3 years after the pull request was opened.
beprogrammed 5y ago
"Every time I look at LV2, I am repulsed. LADSPA is KISS, one header file dependency and relatively straight-forward. LV2 is like the opposite of KISS. It's like FART: Forget About Representing Terseness. It reminds me of something from IBM. The dependency is like 6 different little libraries that no one will ever use for anything else. And all that this complexity really buys you is shitty in-process GUIs that crash your host program." Lol. That's what made his software so great, he kept it non. But I can see the problem when others start wanting to add features via bloat. Two contrasting desires, does he stick with the thing that made his software great, or add any feature someone wants?
- mxmilkiib 5y ago
  falkTX maintains a fork of Non-Mixer that adds LV2 support; https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/non-mixer-lv2-git https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/non-mixer-lv2-git
fundamental 5y ago
Just FYI, I don't think any of the claimed heated threads were captured by the internet archive's sweeps. There were a couple linked to post-fork which were either archived too early, too late, or not at all. disclaimer - I am one of the github users in the linked thread.

ncann 5y ago

Yeah, although if I read the thread right his first comment was also 3 years after the pull request was opened.

beprogrammed 5y ago

"Every time I look at LV2, I am repulsed. LADSPA is KISS, one header file dependency and relatively straight-forward. LV2 is like the opposite of KISS. It's like FART: Forget About Representing Terseness. It reminds me of something from IBM. The dependency is like 6 different little libraries that no one will ever use for anything else. And all that this complexity really buys you is shitty in-process GUIs that crash your host program." Lol. That's what made his software so great, he kept it non. But I can see the problem when others start wanting to add features via bloat. Two contrasting desires, does he stick with the thing that made his software great, or add any feature someone wants?

mxmilkiib 5y ago
falkTX maintains a fork of Non-Mixer that adds LV2 support; https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/non-mixer-lv2-git https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/non-mixer-lv2-git

fundamental 5y ago

Just FYI, I don't think any of the claimed heated threads were captured by the internet archive's sweeps. There were a couple linked to post-fork which were either archived too early, too late, or not at all. disclaimer - I am one of the github users in the linked thread.