AW: [Jsynthlib-devel] Roland MT32 files ready for inclusion in JSynthLib source tree

[Joachim B. <jba...@pi...>]

Hi,

> 1 - Even though the old-style loading and saving code is=20
> still included,=20
> I made some non-trivial changes to the code that interacts=20
> with it (so=20
> that it can also load XML libraries if it needs to), and I haven't=20
> tested my changes very thoroughly.

Sounds interesting but I think we should wait for the "core" developers
to state their opinion (a week or so?).

How does the XML format look like?
Can you post an example?

> 2 - I've also changed the way sysex messages are delivered to the=20
> drivers. I think that this new design is much better and more=20
> flexible.... but, again, my *implementation* of it might have=20
> some bugs.

Can you explain the changes a bit deeper?

Or maybe post a "diff" between the old and new files?

> I fear that JSL has slipped into a development=20
> "coma".=20

Oh, that's normal in the JSynthLib project. ;-)
We need some core developers with a little bit more time. ;-)

Regards,
Joachim


> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: jsy...@li...=20
> [mailto:jsy...@li...] Im=20
> Auftrag von Joe Emenaker
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 9. Oktober 2005 00:50
> An: jsy...@li...
> Betreff: Re: [Jsynthlib-devel] Roland MT32 files ready for=20
> inclusion in JSynthLib source tree
>=20
> Fred Jan Kraan wrote:
>=20
> > Can any of the current maintainers of the JSynthLib source=20
> tree test=20
> > the current version of the Roland MT32 driver set? It works=20
> OK on my=20
> > machine and Eclipse doesn't complain about it. The set is not yet=20
> > complete, but workable. Some user input would be useful.
>=20
> I can do it, but my current development set differs from the=20
> current CVS=20
> code in a non-trivial way. Some months back, I did a bunch of work on=20
> putting in support for saving libraries in XML format. I got=20
> it to the=20
> point where it could load either format (old serialization=20
> style or new=20
> XML format) and, when you save, it saved in both formats.
>=20
> I have a few thoughts about whether I should commit the changes:
>=20
> 1 - Even though the old-style loading and saving code is=20
> still included,=20
> I made some non-trivial changes to the code that interacts=20
> with it (so=20
> that it can also load XML libraries if it needs to), and I haven't=20
> tested my changes very thoroughly.
> 2 - I've also changed the way sysex messages are delivered to the=20
> drivers. I think that this new design is much better and more=20
> flexible.... but, again, my *implementation* of it might have=20
> some bugs.
> 3 - We haven't discussed the XML format of the libraries.=20
> Back when we=20
> last discussed it, nobody seemed to really care, so I just created an=20
> XML format that I thought was fairly flexible. I don't want=20
> to commit my=20
> code and then have some people start asking for us to change the XML=20
> format. So, if you care at all about the XML library format,=20
> speak now.
> 4 - Countering all of these reservations I've just listed,=20
> I'd like to=20
> point out that I've seen *no* activity on the JSL-CVS mailing=20
> list for=20
> months. I fear that JSL has slipped into a development=20
> "coma". In light=20
> of that, even though committing some of my changes might cause a few=20
> bugs here and there, maybe the new changes will also spur a renewed=20
> surge in development.
>=20
> Thoughts?
>=20
> - Joe
>=20
>=20