FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-20-2009, 01:18 PM
Andreas Tille
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote:

For instance, I posted some apps which are not in Debian right now as wishes
(RFP):


http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=rosea.grammostola@gmail.co m

(There is work on progress on Frescobaldi, Rumor (my first Debian package
) and Gtklick.)


Of course we have the Debian Multimedia Team, which takes care of a lot of
multimedia packages for Debian. So if you like to help in this progress, the
best thing you could do imo is joining the Debian Multimedia Team:


http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers


As an additional hint the multimedia team might consider using the Debian Pure
Blends framework which enables them to show quite simply what is just there and
what they are working on (for instance see just issued bits [1]). So if you
are interested in those tasks and bugs pages or in multimedia related metapackages
just ask me in case there might be some technical questions about Blends.
You can read more here [2].

ps: I'm not an official member of the Debian Multimedia Team myself. I'm just
a musician which uses Debian now, but I think I'm gonna join the team myself.
I recently build my first Debian package , so I'm almost ready to join


Good luck for joining

Andreas.


[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/03/msg00013.html
[2] http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends/

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-20-2009, 02:29 PM
Fabian Greffrath
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

As an additional hint the multimedia team might consider using the Debian Pure
Blends framework which enables them to show quite simply what is just there and
what they are working on (for instance see just issued bits [1]). So if you
are interested in those tasks and bugs pages or in multimedia related metapackages
just ask me in case there might be some technical questions about Blends.
You can read more here [2].


Speaking for the pkg-multimedia-maintainers, i.e. the actual Debian
Multimedia Team, we don't see ourself as a Debian Blend. We are just a
bunch of maintainers maintaining a bunch of packages *in* Debian:


http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pkg-multimedia-maintainers%40lists.alioth.debian.org

Have a nice weekend,
Fabian

--
Dipl.-Phys. Fabian Greffrath

Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Lehrstuhl für Energieanlagen und Energieprozesstechnik (LEAT)
Universitätsstr. 150, IB 3/134
D-44780 Bochum

Telefon: +49 (0)234 / 32-26334
Fax: +49 (0)234 / 32-14227
E-Mail: greffrath@leat.ruhr-uni-bochum.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-20-2009, 03:01 PM
Michael Hanke
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:29:35PM +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>> As an additional hint the multimedia team might consider using the Debian Pure
>> Blends framework which enables them to show quite simply what is just there and
>> what they are working on (for instance see just issued bits [1]). So if you
>> are interested in those tasks and bugs pages or in multimedia related metapackages
>> just ask me in case there might be some technical questions about Blends.
>> You can read more here [2].
>
> Speaking for the pkg-multimedia-maintainers, i.e. the actual Debian
> Multimedia Team, we don't see ourself as a Debian Blend. We are just a
> bunch of maintainers maintaining a bunch of packages *in* Debian:

Right, and that is what blends are about -- maintaining packages *in*
Debian. You just get some additional magic that helps you to make your
work a bit more visible and guides users like the starter of this
thread, as well as potential contributers

Overly simplifying, you get something like this:

http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/imaging.html

instead of:

> http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pkg-multimedia-maintainers%40lists.alioth.debian.org


;-)


Michael


--
GPG key: 1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke
http://apsy.gse.uni-magdeburg.de/hanke
ICQ: 48230050


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-21-2009, 01:43 PM
Grammostola Rosea
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

Michael Hanke wrote:

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 04:29:35PM +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:


As an additional hint the multimedia team might consider using the Debian Pure
Blends framework which enables them to show quite simply what is just there and
what they are working on (for instance see just issued bits [1]). So if you
are interested in those tasks and bugs pages or in multimedia related metapackages
just ask me in case there might be some technical questions about Blends.
You can read more here [2].

Speaking for the pkg-multimedia-maintainers, i.e. the actual Debian
Multimedia Team, we don't see ourself as a Debian Blend. We are just a
bunch of maintainers maintaining a bunch of packages *in* Debian:



Right, and that is what blends are about -- maintaining packages *in*
Debian. You just get some additional magic that helps you to make your
work a bit more visible and guides users like the starter of this
thread, as well as potential contributers
My aim as the thread starter was to ask for developers and/or package
maintainers for multimedia in Debian. Because there are a lot nice
packages which are not in Debian now or are pretty outdated. I know the
Debian Multimedia Team exist, but I think they can use some help here...


Regards,




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-21-2009, 08:36 PM
Andreas Tille
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote:

Speaking for the pkg-multimedia-maintainers, i.e. the actual Debian
Multimedia Team, we don't see ourself as a Debian Blend. We are just a
bunch of maintainers maintaining a bunch of packages *in* Debian:


Right, and that is what blends are about -- maintaining packages *in*
Debian.


I really hope that people will get the right impression what Blends
are and start reading before they make wrong assumptions.

My aim as the thread starter was to ask for developers and/or package
maintainers for multimedia in Debian. Because there are a lot nice packages
which are not in Debian now or are pretty outdated. I know the Debian
Multimedia Team exist, but I think they can use some help here...


Yes, definitely. And to get some help you need to be visible and give
your project some better structure. If you want to learn about the
reason for maintaining a Blend instead of beeing a bunch of maintainers
just read the doc [1] (BTW, this helps to avoid wrong asumptions that
packages are not *in* Debian).

Kind regards

Andreas.

[1] http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends/
--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-22-2009, 06:15 PM
Jim
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

Grammostola Rosea,

Hi. I took the suggestion of one of the replies to your original post
and read about debian pure blends, and at first I thought demudi was a
pure blend; it's listed as one of the projects but is not actually a
pure blend, which I guess means they might have updated apps and
specifically compiled kernels to support various pro audio needs.

I want also to direct your attention to the kernel, as it has the
possibility to be more supportive of those specific needs, by having
low latency and real-time extensions patched and enabled. The debian
folks (especially "waldi" aka Bastien Blank will say some or all of
these are less stable than they could be -- perhaps googling around or
asking him when he's not so busy will drum up some details.)

To the group,

I'd like to see Demudi become a pure blend. What are the issues?

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:02 AM, Grammostola Rosea
<rosea.grammostola@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since a while I'm pretty active in using Debian/Linux for Multimedia
> production, especially focusing on music production (check
> www.linuxmusicians.com for instance).
>
> Debian is a great system to use for this. Unfortunately there are nice
> music production applications which are not in Debian yet or are
> pretty outdated (also those in unstable). It would be nice if we could
> improve Debian for multimedia production and package more multimedia
> packages and keep them up to date.
>
> For instance, I posted some apps which are not in Debian right now as wishes
> (RFP):
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=rosea.grammostola@gmail.co m
>
> (There is work on progress on Frescobaldi, Rumor (my first Debian package
> ) and Gtklick.)
>
> Of course we have the Debian Multimedia Team, which takes care of a lot of
> multimedia packages for Debian. So if you like to help in this progress, the
> best thing you could do imo is joining the Debian Multimedia Team:
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
>
> ps: I'm not an official member of the Debian Multimedia Team myself. I'm
> just a musician which uses Debian now, but I think I'm gonna join the team
> myself. I recently build my first Debian package , so I'm almost ready to
> join
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-22-2009, 08:50 PM
Andreas Tille
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Jim wrote:


Hi. I took the suggestion of one of the replies to your original post
and read about debian pure blends, and at first I thought demudi was a
pure blend;


At the time of writing the DeMuDi project *intended* to become 100%
Debian - but this intend was not fullfilled finally.


it's listed as one of the projects but is not actually a
pure blend, which I guess means they might have updated apps and
specifically compiled kernels to support various pro audio needs.


Yes, DeMuDi does not fall under the definition of a Blend. But
this is no reason not to start a new effort inside Debian to
support multimedia.


I'd like to see Demudi become a pure blend. What are the issues?


If you ask me - just go for it.

Kind regards

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-23-2009, 11:42 AM
Felipe Sateler
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

Andreas Tille wrote:

> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Jim wrote:
>
>> Hi. I took the suggestion of one of the replies to your original post
>> and read about debian pure blends, and at first I thought demudi was a
>> pure blend;
>
> At the time of writing the DeMuDi project *intended* to become 100%
> Debian - but this intend was not fullfilled finally.

The DeMuDi project is dead AFAIK. The 64studio spawned from it, and can't be a
pure blend. Actually the demudi team merged with the Debian Multimedia
Maintainers, so we now work together. I would suggest removing it from the
blends list (although the section on why demudi/64studio couldn't be a blend is
useful to highlight that blends are _in_ Debian).

>
>> it's listed as one of the projects but is not actually a
>> pure blend, which I guess means they might have updated apps and
>> specifically compiled kernels to support various pro audio needs.
>
> Yes, DeMuDi does not fall under the definition of a Blend. But
> this is no reason not to start a new effort inside Debian to
> support multimedia.

There is an effort to support multimedia, a merge of the 2 previous efforts.

After reading the documentation, I still don't know if a blend is useful for us.
Blends seem to be some kind of cooler tasks, is that true? For them to be
really useful there should be clearly defined use cases that justify creating
the metapackages and tasks, for which I'm afraid there aren't in the multimedia
world. Other than ardour or audacity, every multimedia user will probably use a
different set of tools for doing their work (ie, there are lots of alternative
software synthesizers/effects processors/whatever). If there is no such clear
set of tools, is there a point in creating a blend?

--

Felipe Sateler


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-23-2009, 01:25 PM
Andreas Tille
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Felipe Sateler wrote:


The DeMuDi project is dead AFAIK.


This fits to my observation.


The 64studio spawned from it, and can't be a
pure blend. Actually the demudi team merged with the Debian Multimedia
Maintainers, so we now work together.


That's really good.


I would suggest removing it from the
blends list (although the section on why demudi/64studio couldn't be a blend is
useful to highlight that blends are _in_ Debian).


I'd suggest to keep it for some while there for the purpose you mentioned
except if there is some new effort taking over the role of a Blend (see below).


There is an effort to support multimedia, a merge of the 2 previous efforts.


This is really godd news and gives some hope.


After reading the documentation, I still don't know if a blend is useful for us.
Blends seem to be some kind of cooler tasks, is that true?


Well, the terminology was taken over from tasksel at some former point
in time - but it is a little bit more.


For them to be
really useful there should be clearly defined use cases that justify creating
the metapackages and tasks, for which I'm afraid there aren't in the multimedia
world. Other than ardour or audacity, every multimedia user will probably use a
different set of tools for doing their work (ie, there are lots of alternative
software synthesizers/effects processors/whatever). If there is no such clear
set of tools, is there a point in creating a blend?


I'm not sure whether your point of view is based on your large amount of
knowledge you might have about this field. You definitely know what to use
and where to look at. Assume a person who is installing Debian the first
time. Which advise would you give if this person might ask you: What
Multimedia software is inside Debian. What should I install for a start.
Which applications should I try to find out which might fit my needs best?

I can not imagine that multimedia is that different from other Blends. Look
at the Debian Med biology task: There are more than 60 Dependencies inside
Debian and there is not a single user who is using them all. We sometimes
consider to split this up to some extend but did not until now. The fact is
if a biologists asks you: What biological software is inside Debian? You can
simply answer: Lock here:

http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/bio.html

What should I install to get ready for work quickly?

apt-get install med-bio

For sure this installs several applications which are not needed by every
person - but this is no exception to any other method to install a group
of software. Metapackages are builded that way that you can deinstall
every application because it uses only Recommends. So the user can start,
try and in case of get bored by something remove a package later.

Blends are intending to give the flat package pool some user specific
structure which regards the needs of a certain group of users. And you
as the multimedia developers are the people who know these users and
might be able to prepare the system as good as possible. I might imagine
certain tasks (please be patient - it is a suggestion of a poor user
regarding multimedia stuff, just correct me if I'm wrong about your
purposes):

sound-recording
sound-playing
video-recording
video-playing
image-editors
image-viewers
note-editors (for noteedit - no idea whether this is a reasonable category name)
...

Probably syncing with existing DebTags (I did not checked these) should
be a good advise. Probably more fine graining needs to be done.

At least I would *really* love to have an overview about these categories
in Debian. Technically you might also approach this by applying DebTags
and my goal is to technically merge DebTags and Blends technique stronger
in the future. But as far as I know there is no such thing like a tasks
or a bugs overview based on DebTags. Moreover you are able to include
packages into your focus which are maintained by maintainers who are not
joining your Multimedia Team (for whatever reason).

I hope I was able to give some reasons why a Blend makes sense.

Kind regards

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 03-25-2009, 09:23 AM
Felipe Sateler
 
Default Please Improve Debian for Multimedia Production

Andreas Tille wrote:

>> After reading the documentation, I still don't know if a blend is useful for
>> us. Blends seem to be some kind of cooler tasks, is that true?
>
> Well, the terminology was taken over from tasksel at some former point
> in time - but it is a little bit more.

Could you elaborate a bit? From what I gather (after reading the docs and
skipping through the pages you have referenced), all I see are tasks (enhanced
with metapackages with Recommends), and a nice web frontend. I'm pretty sure
I'm missing something here.

>
>> For them to be
>> really useful there should be clearly defined use cases that justify creating
>> the metapackages and tasks, for which I'm afraid there aren't in the
>> multimedia world. Other than ardour or audacity, every multimedia user will
>> probably use a different set of tools for doing their work (ie, there are
>> lots of alternative software synthesizers/effects processors/whatever). If
>> there is no such clear set of tools, is there a point in creating a blend?
>
> I'm not sure whether your point of view is based on your large amount of
> knowledge you might have about this field. You definitely know what to use
> and where to look at. Assume a person who is installing Debian the first
> time. Which advise would you give if this person might ask you: What
> Multimedia software is inside Debian. What should I install for a start.
> Which applications should I try to find out which might fit my needs best?

If a person asked me that giving me the freedom to choose OS, I would be at a
loss. For example, if somebody asked me: What should I install to get started
in sound synthesis? (A more concrete example, and which I know best) I would
not know what to say. There are big graphical sequencer and synth, like lmms,
or graphical synths like puredata, or text synths, like csound or
supercollider. Which one would be best? Install all of them? IME, people learn
a program/language and stick to it. It's like trying to create a Software
Development blend... it's just too broad and defined by personal preference,
with no clear better packages.

>
> I can not imagine that multimedia is that different from other Blends. Look
> at the Debian Med biology task: There are more than 60 Dependencies inside
> Debian and there is not a single user who is using them all. We sometimes
> consider to split this up to some extend but did not until now. The fact is
> if a biologists asks you: What biological software is inside Debian? You can
> simply answer: Lock here:
>
> http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/bio.html
>
> What should I install to get ready for work quickly?
>
> apt-get install med-bio
>
> For sure this installs several applications which are not needed by every
> person - but this is no exception to any other method to install a group
> of software. Metapackages are builded that way that you can deinstall
> every application because it uses only Recommends. So the user can start,
> try and in case of get bored by something remove a package later.
>
> Blends are intending to give the flat package pool some user specific
> structure which regards the needs of a certain group of users. And you
> as the multimedia developers are the people who know these users and
> might be able to prepare the system as good as possible. I might imagine
> certain tasks (please be patient - it is a suggestion of a poor user
> regarding multimedia stuff, just correct me if I'm wrong about your
> purposes):
>
> sound-recording
> sound-playing
> video-recording
> video-playing
> image-editors
> image-viewers
> note-editors (for noteedit - no idea whether this is a reasonable
> category name) ...

Although I wouldn't choose those tasks[1], but lets go over them to illustrate
my point. What should we put into sound-recording? All of them? The X more
popular according to popcon? The ones I use? Also, use cases overlap: I don't
think there is a sound recorder that is not also a sound player.

> Probably syncing with existing DebTags (I did not checked these) should
> be a good advise. Probably more fine graining needs to be done.
>
> At least I would *really* love to have an overview about these categories
> in Debian. Technically you might also approach this by applying DebTags
> and my goal is to technically merge DebTags and Blends technique stronger
> in the future. But as far as I know there is no such thing like a tasks
> or a bugs overview based on DebTags. Moreover you are able to include
> packages into your focus which are maintained by maintainers who are not
> joining your Multimedia Team (for whatever reason).
>
> I hope I was able to give some reasons why a Blend makes sense.

I agree that it makes sense, at least for some users. However, maintaining a
Blend is (I assume) time consuming. What I'm wondering is if it is worth the
effort. Is it going to ease our work as a team? Is it going to make it easier
for 64studio to integrate with us?


[1] Actually, the multimedia name is a bit misleading. It's mostly sound and
video apps/codecs.

--

Felipe Sateler


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:40 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org