From: delphiro <del...@zo...> - 2002-07-31 16:26:03
|
>BTW, this mailing list has now 51 subscribers (an all-time record I believe), >and I can't help wondering, what this abstract and silent audience thinks of >us. Well to be less abstract and silent.. I just read my first daily rosegarden Email and its better than the average gossip magazine ;-) by the way, I am trying to dig into the Rosegarden source.. shame I can't get any midi because of my brandnew only M$ supported soundblaster Audigy. But I am very offtopic now. Greetings (I hope to be helpful soon) Rob |
From: mario m. <par...@ti...> - 2002-08-06 21:30:09
|
C'=E8 per caso qualcuno che parla italiano? Grazie! mario moles |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2002-08-06 22:18:05
|
On Tuesday 06 August 2002 23:16, mario moles wrote: > C'è per caso qualcuno che parla italiano? I'm afraid none of us speaks italian, sorry. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Richard B. <bo...@bo...> - 2002-08-07 06:03:36
|
Guillaume Laurent wrote: > On Tuesday 06 August 2002 23:16, mario moles wrote: > > C'è per caso qualcuno che parla italiano? > > I'm afraid none of us speaks italian, sorry. Sì, ma noi ancora Babel. B |
From: Arran Rothwell-E. <the...@ho...> - 2003-02-26 19:03:46
|
my email keeps filling up!!! please remove me from your list as i no longer wish to have the noticeboard messages sent directly to me. thankyou. _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself with cool emoticons http://messenger.msn.co.uk |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2003-02-27 10:27:49
|
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 20:03, Arran Rothwell-Eyre wrote: > my email keeps filling up!!! please remove me from your list as i no > longer wish to have the noticeboard messages sent directly to me. thankyou. I've unsubscribed you. For the record, this is something you could have done yourself, using the URL at the bottom of every messages from the list : > Rosegarden-devel mailing list > Ros...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel -- Guillaume http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: <ric...@fe...> - 2004-04-10 19:19:03
|
Rosegarden-devel" <ros...@li...> Subject: Re: velocity ruler state Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 19:17:58 +0000 X-Mailer: IlohaMail/0.8.11 (On: www.ukfsn.org) In-Reply-To: <opr...@ma...> From: <ric...@fe...> Bounce-To: <ric...@fe...> Errors-To: <ric...@fe...> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> It's currently per Segment. It could be global with a little effort.. > >Should we wait for other's oppinion? Don't worry. I'm not about to code it. Anyway, I don't think anyone apart from me and you has even voiced any opinion on this subject yet. R |
From: Ramile De B. <ram...@ya...> - 2004-04-25 22:26:37
|
Hi! I'm 21 years old. My name is Ramile, and I can help you with making sounds, testing music software etc. I'm working at music studio in Kiev, Ukraine. I'm sound engineer, and have good knowleges in creation songs, mixing etc. I can help you with doc writing, or translating it in to russian or ukrainian. If you need me - write to me. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢ http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash |
From: Nicholas B. <n.j...@el...> - 2005-02-27 11:35:13
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Hold on. You never tried make -f Makefile.cvs, or better, any of the > xx_configure scripts in the scripts/ directory ? > Nope :) >> I've no idea how you managed to build RG without these changes. > > We've been building it for the past 5 years like all other KDE app > developpers do : make -f Makefile.cvs && ./configure . It's the > standard way to build a KDE app from a CVS tree. > Good tip! That seems to do the trick :) OK, Dougie's new Makefile.ams should probably be disregarded largely. They still do make the sound and sequencer libraries noinst ones which is a Good Thing (TM), right? The reason we never noticed in the first place is that we did all of the pitch tracker work against a release rather than the CVS, because we wanted a bit of stability while learing our way around RG and generally getting things off the ground. No wonder nobody answered our posts about the configure system not working. We didn't realise it was a stupid question. Speaking for myself, I avoid KDE generally and tend to write mostly in Qt (with qmake) or java these days, so it was all probably my fault. Blame the purchase of this damned stupid PowerBook ("it really is Unix" -- yes, Jim, but not as we know it. Can't run KDE for a start :). It does do Qt and Java quite well? not well, but prettily. I've learned my lesson now. Linux ia32 for the laptop next time. N/. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iD8DBQFCIbAeFo+kGmUnzkQRAv0GAJwLFmn/OSteHDwamUhXWegDpN3ZMQCfYlOe mS0aV8DAnEgse5GjQTEfEWg= =cknM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-02-27 15:41:21
|
On Sunday 27 February 2005 12:33, Nicholas Bailey wrote: > > Hold on. You never tried make -f Makefile.cvs, or better, any of the > > xx_configure scripts in the scripts/ directory ? > > Nope :) Well, that would have spared you a lot of headaches. > OK, Dougie's new Makefile.ams should probably be disregarded largely. > They still do make the sound and sequencer libraries noinst ones which > is a Good Thing (TM), right? The reason we never noticed in the first > place is that we did all of the pitch tracker work against a release > rather than the CVS, because we wanted a bit of stability while learing > our way around RG and generally getting things off the ground. That was a good move, but KDE apps require a different set of commands to build from CVS. This is really a FAQ, too bad we never got around to set you on the right track. > No wonder nobody answered our posts about the configure system not > working. We didn't realise it was a stupid question. It's not that it was a stupid question, it's that probably nobody understood what your problem was exactly. > Speaking for > myself, I avoid KDE generally and tend to write mostly in Qt (with > qmake) or java these days, so it was all probably my fault. Blame the > purchase of this damned stupid PowerBook ("it really is Unix" -- yes, > Jim, but not as we know it. Can't run KDE for a start :). It does do Qt > and Java quite well? not well, but prettily. I've learned my lesson > now. Linux ia32 for the laptop next time. Er, I know of at least one KDE dev who has a powerbook (Georges Staikos), and he runs both OS/X and Linux/KDE on it. Anyway, now that scons is shaping up, we'll hopefully be able to do without the autocrap soon. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Vladimir S. <vl...@eh...> - 2005-05-15 12:58:03
|
Guillaume, Could you try to remove segment names and surrounding box for selected segments only? Guess it would be helpful to see segment previews for segments ready for editing at lest. Vlada |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-05-15 18:59:09
|
On Sunday 15 May 2005 16:44, Vladimir Savic wrote: > > Could you try to remove segment names and surrounding box for selected > segments only? Guess it would be helpful to see segment previews for > segments ready for editing at lest. That can be done, but I'm not sure not seeing the labels on segments unless they are selected is really practical. That said, I'm actually starting to wonder if segment labels are at all useful. After all they disappear as soon as you scroll a bit, and the labels on the tracks buttons can convey the same kind of information. Perhaps as tooltips ? -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Silvan <dmm...@us...> - 2005-05-15 22:18:48
|
On Sunday 15 May 2005 02:59 pm, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > wonder if segment labels are at all useful. After all they disappear as > soon as you scroll a bit, and the labels on the tracks buttons can convey > the same kind of information. Perhaps as tooltips ? For an example of how someone put them to good use, look at Steve Conrad's bogus-surf-jam. I was going to look at it myself until I remembered I don't have a runable Rosegarden currently. Oops. I think having them as tooltips would make it a lot less intuitive stringing little bits of stuff together like that. You'd have a lot of anonymous, generic segments, perhaps color coded in some fashion, and you'd have to hover over each one to see what it is. For my own use, I used to use markers to indicate the sorts of things I now indicate with segment labels. Our marker facility kind of sucks. Our label facility (judging as someone who has been running 1.0 exclusively for the last couple of weeks) is easy to use, and convenient. I think it's just fine. The only thing that's kind of dumb is the (copied)(split)(split) (copied)(split) nonsense tacked on the end, but I guess even that is better than the alternative of giving the copies some name like "foodiddle1" "foodiddle2" etc. -- Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <dmm...@us...> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/ http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/ |
From: Vladimir S. <vl...@eh...> - 2005-05-15 22:41:51
|
On Sun, 15 May 2005 20:59:48 +0200, Guillaume Laurent <gla...@te...> wrote: > On Sunday 15 May 2005 16:44, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> >> Could you try to remove segment names and surrounding box for selected >> segments only? Guess it would be helpful to see segment previews for >> segments ready for editing at lest. > > That can be done, but I'm not sure not seeing the labels on segments > unless > they are selected is really practical. I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is selected! > That said, I'm actually starting to > wonder if segment labels are at all useful. After all they disappear as > soon > as you scroll a bit, and the labels on the tracks buttons can convey the For me, the optimal zoom lavel is 25%. For every composition longer than 2 minutes 100% is useless. > same > kind of information. Perhaps as tooltips ? > You could probubly read my feature requset on sf. I have had some thoughts on similar problems there. http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1187341&group_id=4932&atid=354932 Vlada |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-05-16 05:53:36
|
On Monday 16 May 2005 02:31, Vladimir Savic wrote: > On Sun, 15 May 2005 20:59:48 +0200, Guillaume Laurent > > <gla...@te...> wrote: > > On Sunday 15 May 2005 16:44, Vladimir Savic wrote: > >> Could you try to remove segment names and surrounding box for selected > >> segments only? Guess it would be helpful to see segment previews for > >> segments ready for editing at lest. > > > > That can be done, but I'm not sure not seeing the labels on segments > > unless > > they are selected is really practical. > > I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is > selected! Ooops. Yeah, that looks good. Change is in cvs. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Vladimir S. <vl...@eh...> - 2005-05-16 17:17:35
|
On Mon, 16 May 2005 07:53:52 +0200, Guillaume Laurent <gla...@te...> wrote: > On Monday 16 May 2005 02:31, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> On Sun, 15 May 2005 20:59:48 +0200, Guillaume Laurent >> >> <gla...@te...> wrote: >> > On Sunday 15 May 2005 16:44, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> >> Could you try to remove segment names and surrounding box for >> selected >> >> segments only? Guess it would be helpful to see segment previews for >> >> segments ready for editing at lest. >> > >> > That can be done, but I'm not sure not seeing the labels on segments >> > unless >> > they are selected is really practical. >> >> I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is >> selected! > > Ooops. Yeah, that looks good. Change is in cvs. > When should we expect that to appear? |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-05-16 17:55:56
|
On Monday 16 May 2005 21:02, Vladimir Savic wrote: > On Mon, 16 May 2005 07:53:52 +0200, Guillaume Laurent > > <gla...@te...> wrote: > > On Monday 16 May 2005 02:31, Vladimir Savic wrote: > > >> I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is > >> selected! > > > > Ooops. Yeah, that looks good. Change is in cvs. > > When should we expect that to appear? Quite soon now I suppose. It's a very simple change : void CompositionView::drawCompRectLabel(const CompositionRect& r, QPainter *p, const QRect& clipRect) { // draw segment label // - if (!r.getLabel().isEmpty()) { + if (!r.getLabel().isEmpty() && !r.isSelected()) { -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Vladimir S. <vl...@eh...> - 2005-05-16 19:27:34
|
On Mon, 16 May 2005 19:56:24 +0200, Guillaume Laurent <gla...@te...> wrote: > On Monday 16 May 2005 21:02, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> On Mon, 16 May 2005 07:53:52 +0200, Guillaume Laurent >> >> <gla...@te...> wrote: >> > On Monday 16 May 2005 02:31, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> >> >> I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is >> >> selected! >> > >> > Ooops. Yeah, that looks good. Change is in cvs. >> >> When should we expect that to appear? > > Quite soon now I suppose. It's a very simple change : > > void CompositionView::drawCompRectLabel(const CompositionRect& r, > QPainter *p, > const QRect& clipRect) > { > // draw segment label > // > - if (!r.getLabel().isEmpty()) { > + if (!r.getLabel().isEmpty() && !r.isSelected()) { > Tell me amount of money!!!! :) I want to learn coding... This looks so trivial like anyone could do it. Anyway, I like this behaviur. :) |
From: William <ros...@or...> - 2005-05-17 08:43:33
|
Guillaume Laurent wrote: > > On Monday 16 May 2005 02:31, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> On Sun, 15 May 2005 20:59:48 +0200, Guillaume Laurent wrote: >> > On Sunday 15 May 2005 16:44, Vladimir Savic wrote: >> >> Could you try to remove segment names and surrounding box for selected >> >> segments only? Guess it would be helpful to see segment previews for >> >> segments ready for editing at lest. >> > >> > That can be done, but I'm not sure not seeing the labels on segments >> > unless they are selected is really practical. >> >> I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is selected! > > Ooops. Yeah, that looks good. Change is in cvs. I'd add that being able to see segment labels while segments are selected is very useful - probably essential - for editing parts in the track editor. William (dropping in briefly...) |
From: Chris C. <ca...@al...> - 2005-05-17 03:10:55
|
On Monday 16 May 2005 06:53, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > On Monday 16 May 2005 02:31, Vladimir Savic wrote: > > I ment on totaly opposite thing. Labels to disappear if segment is > > selected! > > Ooops. Yeah, that looks good. Change is in cvs. I'm sorry, but that's just weird. It's particularly weird that when you first draw an empty segment it has no label until you unselect it. And it's weird because it's kind of ineffective because the selected (darker) segments are harder to see previews on anyway. But it'd be pretty weird anyway. I think we need nice translucent labels. And a clearer colour scheme for the previews, as I was suggesting a while ago -- e.g. white on a darker background, black on a lighter one. Chris |
From: Silvan <dmm...@us...> - 2005-05-18 00:11:09
|
On Monday 16 May 2005 04:17 pm, Chris Cannam wrote: > I think we need nice translucent labels. I was about to suggest exactly the same thing. > And a clearer colour scheme for the previews, as I was suggesting a > while ago -- e.g. white on a darker background, black on a lighter one. Yes, I agree. My XOR idea looks like crap in many cases, and there aren't many cases where I'd say it actually looks good either. Mostly it's a lot of blah, with one or two so sos and several gacks. I'm still not quite convinced about this white/dark black/light thing though. It's so hard to pick a good spot to draw the line. I think I'd like to play with it a bit further and see if I can't work out something as pretty as some of these XORed combinationed proved to be, while leaving behind the less than successful ones. I know how to do this stuff on a color wheel, with paints on a palette, but I'm not sure about the math. Worth a play, I think. If you hate it, we can go a different way. -- Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <dmm...@us...> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/ http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/ |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-05-17 07:00:25
|
On Monday 16 May 2005 22:17, Chris Cannam wrote: > > I'm sorry, but that's just weird. [...] Does it ? I thought it looked ok... > I think we need nice translucent labels. Sure... Er, can we wait for Qt4 to make these ? > And a clearer colour scheme for the previews, as I was suggesting a > while ago -- e.g. white on a darker background, black on a lighter one. OK, I'll do it. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Chris C. <ca...@al...> - 2005-05-18 08:58:42
|
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 08:00, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > On Monday 16 May 2005 22:17, Chris Cannam wrote: > > I'm sorry, but that's just weird. [...] > > Does it ? I thought it looked ok... No, sorry, it's just weird. > > I think we need nice translucent labels. > > Sure... Er, can we wait for Qt4 to make these ? Oh, come on -- and you keep going on about how we're not wusses. Surely all it takes is to draw the box background first, then the previews with those pixels within the box appearing in a fainter colour, and then the box outline and the text. By the way, one thing I really like about the new code is the way that the label no longer gets cut off at the right end of the first part of a repeating segment. Chris |
From: Guillaume L. <gla...@te...> - 2005-05-18 10:10:30
|
On Wednesday 18 May 2005 10:59, Chris Cannam wrote: > On Tuesday 17 May 2005 08:00, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > > On Monday 16 May 2005 22:17, Chris Cannam wrote: > > > I'm sorry, but that's just weird. [...] > > > > Does it ? I thought it looked ok... > > No, sorry, it's just weird. OK, feel free to revert it then, right now my version of compositionview.cpp is in a non-compilable state due to me trying to get the audio previews in (much harder than I thought). > > > I think we need nice translucent labels. > [...] > > Surely all it takes is to draw the box background first, then the > previews with those pixels within the box appearing in a fainter > colour, and then the box outline and the text. The way the drawing code is currently designed doesn't make it that simple, and doing it that way would turn it into a big mess. Translucency will have to be done at the X level. > By the way, one thing I really like about the new code is the way that > the label no longer gets cut off at the right end of the first part of > a repeating segment. Yes. BTW, if you had a few brain cycles to spare on helping me solve this : https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1184540&group_id=4932&atid=104932 https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=11661650 I'd be most grateful. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org |
From: Chris C. <ca...@al...> - 2005-05-18 10:18:10
|
On Wednesday 18 May 2005 11:11, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > On Wednesday 18 May 2005 10:59, Chris Cannam wrote: > > On Tuesday 17 May 2005 08:00, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > > > On Monday 16 May 2005 22:17, Chris Cannam wrote: > > > > I'm sorry, but that's just weird. [...] > > > > > > Does it ? I thought it looked ok... > > > > No, sorry, it's just weird. > > OK, feel free to revert it then, right now my version of > compositionview.cpp is in a non-compilable state due to me trying to > get the audio previews in (much harder than I thought). One thing to remember for audio previews -- that will either make things really difficult or possibly slightly easier, but will certainly make them really difficult if it isn't thought about in advance -- is that our main timeline is "musical time" whereas the audio previews are "real time". The ratio between audio preview pixels and on-screen pixels will vary depending on the current tempo, and this may change during an audio segment, so the segments will have to stretch and squash accordingly. The trivial way to do it would be just to convert the real time to timeT for each of the peak frames (using the Composition conversion methods) and then > > > > > I think we need nice translucent labels. > > > > [...] > > > > Surely all it takes is to draw the box background first, then the > > previews with those pixels within the box appearing in a fainter > > colour, and then the box outline and the text. > > The way the drawing code is currently designed doesn't make it that > simple, and doing it that way would turn it into a big mess. > Translucency will have to be done at the X level. > > > By the way, one thing I really like about the new code is the way > > that the label no longer gets cut off at the right end of the first > > part of a repeating segment. > > Yes. BTW, if you had a few brain cycles to spare on helping me solve > this : > > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1184540&gro >up_id=4932&atid=104932 > https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=11661650 > > I'd be most grateful. |