Crazy idea- crowdsource development of some parts of the code so developers can try adding features

[plasticfractal]

This might be a horrible idea. But what if they opened up portions of their code, to whatever extent that is possible, to allow volunteer programmers to try adding features. I don't know if they would want to completely open up their codebase, but maybe crowdsourcing some development might get a lot of features people want done more quickly. Maybe the volunteer dev branches could be part of an "experimental" version of reason that users could opt into. I know I would love to dig into the code and try knocking out some sequencer features. I realize how possibly absurd this sounds, but a partially crowdsourced DAW might become a real juggernaut. The possibilities are endless. Feel free to laugh at my idea, it's ok.

[VariableX]

I see the sequencer improvements people want ( im not one of them, but ill take them ) as really low hanging fruit technically it should be fairly bread and butter stuff.

[stratatonic]

This might be a horrible idea. But what if they opened up portions of their code, to whatever extent that is possible, to allow volunteer programmers to try adding features. I don't know if they would want to completely open up their codebase, but maybe crowdsourcing some development might get a lot of features people want done more quickly. Maybe the volunteer dev branches could be part of an "experimental" version of reason that users could opt into. I know I would love to dig into the code and try knocking out some sequencer features. I realize how possibly absurd this sounds, but a partially crowdsourced DAW might become a real juggernaut. The possibilities are endless. Feel free to laugh at my idea, it's ok.

Free coding?
Don't be giving Verdane any ideas...

Who knows, after they sell off Reason assets in a year or two, it may very well come to that. (keep your coding skills sharp)

[boingy]

This might be a horrible idea. But what if they opened up portions of their code, to whatever extent that is possible, to allow volunteer programmers to try adding features. I don't know if they would want to completely open up their codebase, but maybe crowdsourcing some development might get a lot of features people want done more quickly. Maybe the volunteer dev branches could be part of an "experimental" version of reason that users could opt into. I know I would love to dig into the code and try knocking out some sequencer features. I realize how possibly absurd this sounds, but a partially crowdsourced DAW might become a real juggernaut. The possibilities are endless. Feel free to laugh at my idea, it's ok.

Software does not work like that, m8. Not unless it was designed from the start with that in mind. You can't just expose some bits of it to outside devs. You could spend time making an SDK or some libraries or a sequencer plugin kit or something but that would distract Prop's expensive devs from working on the product.

So, yeah, I'm afraid it is a daft idea. Soz!

[esselfortium]

I think a more realistic request along these lines might be a macro scripting system, like Reaper has. Imagine being able to write a script to instantly perform a tedious time-consuming task that you do often, or a task that would be so tedious and time-consuming that you don't currently consider doing it at all. There are a lot of things we'd all like to see in the sequencer, and realistically no update can possibly cover those bases for everyone. But a scripting system would allow for countless new features to be added as they're needed, no matter how obscure and personalized your desired feature might be.

A plug-in format to customize the sequencer with could also be fantastically powerful, along similar lines.

[Raveshaper]

Opening up your codebase to third party contractors is basically going open source. Open source software goes by another name: "free". Although donation ware also exists.

I have faith that the new leadership is going to do what needs to be done regarding new features. Part of the slow pace of advancement stems from how small the team is.

Essentially what you're asking them to do is kind of open up their developer partnership program as a competitor to Max4Live. I like the idea of some super top tier version of the program where you can design, code, and release your own stuff (with a marketplace like Ableton has), but I just don't see that ever happening.

I really do hope that a true re-write takes place this time. I think a lot of the "no new features" thing can be explained by not being able to change legacy code that is now running as instances in a modern wrapper, similar to a virtual machine. Sometimes if there isn't time, you have to get it down somehow. Quickest way is a new coat of paint.

Forgive me or speculating that, but I can only see the same product sold over again for $129 so many times before I start trying to parse what exactly I'm witnessing and why. If it hasn't changed, maybe it can't be changed. Maybe royalties or contracts or something else prevents a change. Many of the most famous, core devices were contracted work done by other people.

It would make sense for them to provide a way of transferring old projects to the "new file type" inside of the Suite version once the re-write is done. If you want to keep your old files and work on them in the latest greatest version, you have to use Suite.

Take heart: they appear to understand that they need an overhaul and seem to be in the process of doing that.

[Loque]

A good idea, but just in theory... Its like double the number of devs and you need half of time...

It's like a woman needs 9 month to born a baby. How much time does it take if you have 9 women?

[VariableX]

A good idea, but just in theory... Its like double the number of devs and you need half of time...

It's like a woman needs 9 month to born a baby. How much time does it take if you have 9 women?

Yeah but you get nine babies.

[JiggeryPokery]

A good idea, but just in theory... Its like double the number of devs and you need half of time...

It's like a woman needs 9 month to born a baby. How much time does it take if you have 9 women?

Yeah but you get nine babies.

And a housing crisis in 18 years

[Loque]

Yeah but you get nine babies.

And a housing crisis in 18 years

Exactly...9 babys are much more expensive than just one

[VariableX]

And a housing crisis in 18 years

Exactly...9 babys are much more expensive than just one

yes but there is more chance with 9 that one of them will save the world

[Loque]

Exactly...9 babys are much more expensive than just one

yes but there is more chance with 9 that one of them will save the world

Or destroy it

[VariableX]

yes but there is more chance with 9 that one of them will save the world

Or destroy it

sheeet didnt think of that

[boingy]

Babies are evil. Fact.

[Boombastix]

Waveform Tracktion's engine is open source. You can write your own DAW around it if you want. Haven't heard of any activity around it yet though. VCV is open source, but not that many takers, and Blamsoft bailed out and now give their eXpanse VCV modules away for free. Probably extremely hard to make money from the open source sw, thus you don't attract many to start...