Talk:Rosegarden

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Professional sound production WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the technology, equipment, companies and professions related to professional sound production. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

	Free software Portal This article is part of WikiProject Free Software, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve free software-related articles.
Start	rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

[edit] Other platforms

Rosegarden is targeted to Linux. This is hardly gratuitous. Saying it can be cajoled to run under a BSD is as relevant as adding "And also runs under CrossOver Office on <blink>LINUX</blink>" to every article about Windows software. That is, not at all. It will also confuse readers into thinking platforms other than Linux are targeted, when they most certainly are not. Your original research may say it can be beaten into working, but that's not really encyclopaedic - David Gerard 00:53, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

1: "Before the current Rosegarden project, there was another Rosegarden: a now rather antique program, simpler, less powerful but also less resource-hungry. We're calling it "X11 Rosegarden" here, to distinguish it from the newer Rosegarden. It was originally written for Silicon Graphics IRIX machines, and then ported to Linux and other Unix variants. If you're interested, you can still get it in source code form right here." [1]

2: "[The current version of] Rosegarden runs on Linux, so you'll certainly need that." [2].

It seems reasonable to note that the older versions run on non-Linux systems (indeed, was designed for them), but the current version, according to the people who wrote it, is a Linux program. — Lady Lysine Ikinsile 00:57, 2004 Jun 26 (UTC)

I'm not contesting any of that. I simply want the article to note that is runs on other operating systems.

Darrien 03:12, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

So are you then going to add "and also runs on CrossOver Office under Linux" to articles about Windows software where that's the case, or would that be ridiculous? - David Gerard 09:11, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Ah, I see you did, and even think it rated a mention in the introductory sentence as one of the most important things one could possibly want to know about Microsoft Office. Well done. - David Gerard 10:08, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Check the edit history. I removed a gratuitous Linux refence. The paragraph was already there.

Darrien 22:00, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

My apologies, so it was. Nevertheless, you saw absolutely nothing odd or wrong about this - David Gerard 22:06, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Exactly, Wine is not limited to Linux systems, so saying it runs on Linux with Wine is not entirely correct.

Darrien 22:23, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I mean having it mentioned at all in the intro sentence of Microsoft Office. Tell me you're being deliberately obtuse, rather than blinded by advocacy - David Gerard 00:55, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I don't usually change the layout of articles. But what does adovocacy have to do with where something is mentioned in an article. Also, how is correcting an entry in an encyclopedia, advocacy in the first place?

Darrien 04:12, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Consider also the following example:

% uname -srm;icc -V
SunOS 5.9 i86pc
Intel(R) C++ Compiler for 32-bit applications, Version 8.0   Build 20031016Z Package ID: l_cc_p_8.0.055

This is Intel's C++ compiler for Linux running quite happily on Solaris. Does that mean an article about Intel C++ for Linux should mention that you can make it run on Solaris? I don't think so—Intel quite specifically develop it for Linux. — Lady Lysine Ikinsile 00:59, 2004 Jun 26 (UTC)

---

In any case, I accidentally removed the footnote link for this discussion from the article yesterday. Sorry about that. --Ardonik 06:48, 2004 Aug 3 (UTC)