Re: [fluid-dev] The 1.1.0 milestone

[Josh Green]

Hello Bernat,

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 11:00 +0200, Bernat Arlandis i Mañó wrote:
> First, I sent this message but it didn't get to my mailbox and it seems 
> to be ignored by everyone so I guess it didn't reach your mailbox 
> neither, I think it's interesting:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/fluid-dev/2009-04/msg00044.html
> 


I also read it and thought you made some very good points.  I realized
that it wasn't such a big issue as it sounded like at first.  I'll be
sure to answer next time, I guess I took it for granted that what you
said didn't need anything added to it, but I could have at least voiced
my agreement with it.  I still have a little bit of a backlog of
FluidSynth related mail to catch up on, as I haven't had a lot of time
until just a few days ago.


> With all this big changes and new plans, I'm wondering where does lie 
> the 2.0 branch? I could have done some work these holidays but I have 
> the feeling that we're diverging and I prefer to wait for the water to 
> calm down. Before starting this branch I was like one year reading the 
> list and I knew about the development status of FS, and the Miguel's 
> fork. Nowadays I see people jumping in with his own ideas but without 
> knowing much of what has been talked here lately.
> 
> I know everyone's ideas are the best and mine aren't any better unless 
> demonstrated, but I already said the 2.0 branch would take some time and 
> work and doing it alone isn't rewarding. Besides, it might happen that 
> when it's ready no one is interested on it and I end having a fork that 
> I didn't want to start.
> 
> I think I will stop my activity from now on until I see where FS is 
> heading and how. I don't want to spend more time on it until it has a 
> clear route and better organization. Since some things that were planned 
> for 2.0 are now included in the 1.1.0 plan and others are going on a 
> tangent, I think it's time to talk about it all.
> 
> Regards.
> 


I understand your concerns and I think there has indeed been problems
with having good direction and leadership for FluidSynth.  This has been
largely an issue I've been dealing with myself.  Although I feel I have
the potential to be a project leader, I haven't been applying this
ability very well.  Now that there is this recent interest, the last
thing I want to do, is stand in the way of progress and someone's own
process with being a part of the project.

I've been thinking over the 1.1.0 release and the 2.0 branch and how
that fits in.  I think one major thing that FluidSynth has going for it
currently is that many applications are using it.  While the API may
have many issues and be lacking in some areas, there is likely a lot
that can be done underneath, to make things cleaner and an overall
better piece of software, without breaking the API for current
applications.

I think your desire to make a 2.0 branch was born of the desire for the
freedom to innovate and change FluidSynth, without having to think so
much about keeping API compatibility.  FluidSynth could definitely use
innovation.  Its been collecting dust for some time now.  As I am
starting to see things now, the 1.1.0 milestone could be a stepping
stone for 2.0.  So perhaps it is premature at this point, to have a
separate 2.0 branch.

The next release of FluidSynth will largely be a time for us all to come
up to speed on where FluidSynth is, where we want it to go and how to
work as a team to get things done.  It is indeed much less rewarding to
work on something by oneself, without much appreciation for it.  I would
really hate to see that happen.  So it seems more a matter of figuring
out how you can apply what you want to work with on with FluidSynth,
with the 1.1.0 version.  There is plenty to do and I would like to see
you a part of that and the reward it deserves, as much as I myself have
a new desire to be more a part of it.  A lot of the things I have wanted
to do with FluidSynth, have been held back by the necessity to perform
other tasks, that I didn't really want to do.  My hope is that we can
organize things in such a way, where we are each doing what we want to
do and at the same time working cooperatively for the benefit of the
project.

I encourage you to not stop your contributions to FluidSynth and lets
instead discuss what the direction and organization is, as you
suggested.  From that list of proposed items that I sent, I imagine it
was the porting to glib task, that was what we had planned for the 2.0
branch.  I would like to hear more of your thoughts on what you want to
see happen and if and how that could work with the direction of 1.1.0.

Kind regards,
        Josh