On 07/29/2014 10:46 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote:
This isn't so much about importance, but things that we are capable of doing ourselves, and things that we need help to implement. There's no point in a crowdfunding campaign to hire a developer to write things that we can write ourselves. There is a point in hiring a developer to implement (or help implement) something which we can't do without help..

This is not necessarily true.  Simply because we're capable of it doesn't mean we shouldn't seek help.  You mention "professional grade DAW" but our resources are falling short on the small things to.  Programmers, managers, businesses do this all the time.

I'll repeat myself, you can't invite our comments and then tell us they aren't relevant.  You do not get my buy in with this dismissive directive.
 

Tres, I have no idea why you have adopted such an antagonistic attitude in this issue. Maybe we can both take a step back and calm down a bit? I'm not trying to dismiss your opinion or anything.

Sure, we can seek help, and we're already doing that. Everyone is welcome to join in LMMS development and contribute in whatever way they can.

You mention limited resources, which is very true - we're severely lacking in developers. If we do manage to hire a paid developer to work on LMMS for a limited time, that is also another limited resource. So it comes down to plain old logic and resource management: we have both our own limited resources, plus the limited resources we've "bought", and each of those resources should be utilized in such a way that we're utilizing the overall resources most efficiently.

Ergo: it's best to use our own resources (ie. our current volunteer developers) for things which they are capable of doing, and save the "bought" resources (ie. paid developer) for things that we're not capable of implementing on our own. Because otherwise, we're just using all resources on things we could be doing on our own, and the things we can't do on our own are left undone - and when that includes fundamental things like the core, that will mean that we'll run into problems later on... which ultimately will mean that even the improvements we did get done will go to waste.

Does this make sense to you?