I don’t work with music at all, so most of this update doesn’t mean much to me. However, it’s nice to see the export window was improved—I want my single-click behavior, damn it.
The telemetry is limited to update-checking and error reports. Distributions will disable update-checking because they already handle updating Audacity. Error reports need to be manually submitted. It’s possible that most distributions just disable networking altogether when building Audacity, if it even exists in their repositories at all. Fedora’s package is waaay out of date. Arch disables networking altogether.
Audacity has still instituted a CLA. This is quite worrying. But nothing has happened yet.
I should have specified that the Audacity CLA allowed Muse Group to relicense Audacity from GPLv2 to GPLv3. Yes, I agree with you that not all CLAs are bad. While you keep the copyright to all your contributions, because the copyright is assigned to them (? I’m not actually sure about this), they can relicense it. The CLA agreement.
You grant MUSECY SM LTD, an affiliate of MuseScore and Ultimate Guitar, (“Company”) the ability to use the Contributions in any way. You hereby grant to Company , a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works.
There was quite a lot of confusion and outrage about this at the time, so I can’t recall whether Muse Group specifically said they wanted to include Audacity in Apple’s app store or this was given as an example of why the CLA could be beneficial. My rebuttal was this is not a particularly noble cause. There was also the argument that the FSF requires you to sign a CLA for its own projects so it can reserve the right to relicense it if it benefits the project. My rebuttal to this was…well, it’s the FSF. The day the FSF relicenses their software under a non-free license is the day they die.
You’re good. That’s the latest image, it’s just the confusing Debian version scheme where the package version is not the same as the kernel version. Debian package version 6.1.0-17 = kernel version 6.1.69-1
This seems interesting and it seems like a big update. Has anyone used this for print media formatting? Can you speak to how well it works, how easy it is to use, and what it’s like to switch if you’re coming from Publisher or InDesign?
I tried it years ago and it felt more like Quark to me (not a compliment) but should give it another chance. For the past several years I’ve been using Affinity Publisher in a Windows VM.
Edit: just tried it out a bit (ver. 1.5.8 because that’s what’s in the Arch repo) and it’s better than I remembered. Adobe-like shortcuts. I made a new document and created a few text styles.
I’ve previously used versions 1.4.* and 1.5.* quite a bit for print, because I’m a one-man marketing department in a tiny company.
Scribus was (is?) somewhat finicky and cumbersome to work with. It had certain quirks and workarounds you had to learn to deal with. It lacked many creative features you find in bigger suites. I didn’t feel like I worked quickly and efficiently in it. BUT I got my work done in it nevertheless, and I really appreciate that it exists for the people that simply can’t afford the alternatives.
Nowadays I use the Affinity suite, which includes Affinity Publisher, a competitor to InDesign. It’s quite affordable and not subscription-based.
Used Adobe for years, made an effort in the last year to switch to FOSS, mainly Inkscape and Scribus. And yes, as other comments have mentioned these tools have some weird quirks and some things don’t work. But that’s the same for Adobe and most other software. I remember switching from Macromedia Freehand (lol, remember that) to Illustrator back in the day and everything felt just wrong and awful in tge beginning (until you learned to work around the quirks?). It’s super hard to tell how much it’s “Software Bad” vs “Not Used to New Thing” and this will be different for everybody as well. But nobody (including the software) is stopping you from using this professionally, I just finished a 20 page PDF for a client with Scribus, used it to print my 32 page comic etc.
I think it's just because some things have country-specific formats. For example, if you want to prefill credit card details, you have to figure out how the credit card fields are labelled.
Opensource has a forking problem. So much time spent maintaing projects with only a few tweaks differentiating them.
Mint at least improves upon Ubuntu significantly and undoes a lot of their unpopular corporatey decisions. Zorin is literally just Ubuntu with a different face.
I’m using flatpack version which is much more up to date.
I think the big thing is compatibility with current Microsoft office versions.
So there is benefit from being on a newer version unless you’re only using Libre and not sending each other people who are opening it in Microsoft office versions.
9to5linux.com
Top