[Fedora-music-list] Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19?

[Brendan Jones]

On 09/12/2013 12:09 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 09/11/2013 12:42 PM, Sean Beeson wrote:
>>> >>Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19?
>>> >>
>>> >>If so, does anyone have any good how to on dealing with the dependencies?
>> >
>> >Hi Sean:
>> >
>> >With little effort, I found these instructions for Ardour 3.1:
>> >https://blogs.fsfe.org/samtuke/?p=548
>> >
>> >Please let us know whether they still work.
>> >
>> >However, I feel we should start a discussion on what to do about Ardour,
>> >now that they have asked distributions not to package their software.
>> >This is actually a serious ethical dilemma.
>> >
> Have they actually done this? I can't see any mention on the site and
> the only thing in the source appears to be "PACKAGER_README" which has
> a note about naming the package if built with VST support and the
> templates directory. If anything that note suggests they're still okay
> with packaging.

Paul Davis regularly states that he won't respond to bug reports filed 
against Ardour when its been installed via a distribution or 3rd party 
repo ([1] for example).

There is no longer any direct link to the source - you must login, go 
past the option to donate etc, however, this is the case for Ardour 2 as 
well.

I'd like the Ardour maintainers to weigh in - I think we should package 
it anyway. It is open source after all. However, it will require a new 
review request ( we should package both 2 and 3 in parallel, but only 3 
on the spin, assuming its ready in time).

I remember Fernando saying he has a .spec file available on request. 
Volunteers anyone?

regards,

Brendan.
[1] 
http://lists.ardour.org/pipermail/ardour-users-ardour.org/2013-August/012918.html