Recent searches
Search options
We have perhaps one of the most important RFCs we're going to make: should we restart development on a modern Audacity codebase? We have a poll below.
This would bring many missing features and improvements and ease development. We'd keep our changes like no networking, our dynamic compressor, native MKA support with chapters, and others. You'd also receive real-time effects, beats and bars support, clip stretching support, and plenty of others from newer versions of Audacity.
1/2
And yes, you remain our top priority. We'll still listening to you, and that's why we're making this post. Please spread it as far as you can so we can get lots of feedback.
Our values and purpose are also not changing. For packagers, we'd still value any patches to get Tenacity working on other platforms. That's another change we'd keep too. Any patches already contributed to Tenacity will be reapplied if we proceed with this.
2/2
Quick note: we had to edit the poll for two reasons: typo and length. We fixed both those.
We saw someone voted yes before. Fear not, your vote has been counted.
@tenacity All the best with whatever outcome your decision will bring.
Did you also consider cherry-picking certain features from Audacity? Forgejo has developed some tooling around that, and although the codebases starts to diverge and the behaviour is expected to end soonish, it was probably a nice stopgap between being a soft fork (with rebase) and a hard fork without ported changes in the future.
Depending on the state of your codebase, and the percentage of changes you want to use from Audacity vs those that you would need to revert after the rebase, one or another option might be easier.
@Codeberg Thanks! We've actually already been cherry picking features from Audacity this entire time, but unfortunately, it doesn't seem very sustainable given a) the amount of work that needs to be done and b) the amount of maintainer power we currently have.
We'll accept all of Audacity's new features, listening to everyone's feedback, and it shouldn't be too hard to reapply our changes on top. We're also hoping that this makes future development easier with all the new work coming in.
@tenacity@fosstodon.org Isn't this for the developers to decide and not for the users? Personally, as long as I get a de-shittyfied wave editor, I'm fine, no matter the path taken.
@woelkchen Mostly for developers, but users can chip in about what they think of modern versions of Audacity and us using it as a base going forward.