MadTracker.org
Forum - MadTracker 3 to become open-source
Log in Log in Profile Profile Search Memberlist Usergroups FAQ FAQ
 Forum
MadTracker 3
 MadTracker 3 to become open-source
Reply to topic Post new topic  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
RoisHh
Registered User


Joined: 23 Jul 2003
Location: Germany
PostPosted: Mon Jul 02 2018 16:46    
Reply with quote

Is there a beta-version of MT3 somewhere or is it yet to come?

greetz
roisHh


keep on trackin'
 Back to top
View user's journal Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
technoid
Regular


Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Location: Oregon USA
PostPosted: Sun Sep 23 2018 02:53    
Reply with quote

Hello, I haven't logged in here in YEARS, maybe 10 years ago!? Glad I still remember my forum password, heh.

Other than Sourceforge, there is also SOME activity at https://github.com/MadTracker-FOSS/MadTracker3 . When I say "SOME", it's a little more recent activity than at Sourceforge, but still nothing to get excited about.

Granted, from what I read over there, coding it seems to be a can of worms, so I have no reason to hold my breath for MT3 to come out as a working beta release any time soon, much less a stable release.

Personally I don't use MT2 anymore or any other type of tracker. I had used it more as a performance tool rather than making music hooked up to a MIDI controller. If I'm bored I will play someone else's MT2 song, that's about as much as I will use it.

I had been dabbling in OpenMPT a few years ago, but not really that much. MPT has more ongoing support than MadTracker.

In my opinion, it would be just better if you continue to get the most out of MT2 v2.61.

That's my 2 cents. Bye... for now. Smile


~techie
 Back to top
View user's journal Send private message Send e-mail
SX001
Registered User


Joined: 22 Sep 2006
PostPosted: Sun Oct 21 2018 10:03    
Reply with quote

Here we are. You are not alone in this.

technoid wrote:

I had been dabbling in OpenMPT a few years ago, but not really that much. MPT has more ongoing support than MadTracker.


what you mean about "support" ? Its better to avoid the big corporations. We use the old programs and if needed, then retro computers too.

would be better to stick on the working configuration as it is and develop the software not for new, but for old platform and architecture instead. There is really no point about those 64-bit ones.

well, I am developing here the ISA bus soundcard for example. So there would be much more beneficial if the programs would be for DOS which can use the multitrack cards.

At the end this way we get the control over OUR software, OUR hardware (since soundcards we make ourself).
 Back to top
View user's journal Send private message
mindplay
Beta-Tester


Joined: 06 May 2003
Location: Denmark
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04 2019 08:02    
Reply with quote

Hey Yannick,

I think it's clear more than a decade later, nobody wants to work on MT3.

Meanwhile, MT2 is no longer a property - it's now a relic that's been rotting away in a ditch somewhere, for more than a decade. It's never going to see another release, and I'm guessing you haven't sold a license in 10 years now?

Since MT3 was practically still born (even though the vision was beautiful) how about releasing MT2 as open source?

Delphi is long since dead and gone, but Open Pascal is actually a very strong and modern Pascal compiler - it would likely be very possible to get MT2 to build again, with 64-bit CPU support, possibly Linux and Mac versions too, possibly even a browser-based version on WebAssembly.

Do this last honor and service for the few remaining MadTracker fans and those of us who still remember what it was.

I know this project was your baby back in the day - but what is it to you now? What are you protecting?

Let it go, man. Smile
 Back to top
View user's journal Send private message Visit poster's website
SX001
Registered User


Joined: 22 Sep 2006
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04 2019 12:24    
Reply with quote

You are far from alone with this crusade. Some people like Yannik and many others of us grew up and abandoned their favorite hobby. On those days perhaps had too naive ideas or visions saying that it will not die like Impulse Tracker?


still in which direction the development takes the steps,
I vote it to be old platforms compliant for WIN98SE or also for DOS with multiple soundcard support.

But in reality how development goes is nasty.
I have a bad feeling about this. DOes new MT3 support only atleast from the WIN XP or atleast win 7, then I see no point, becouse -- there ARE already many many tracker clones which mimic the multichannel DOS trackers, but have ridiculous minimum requirement demanding for latest platform, while their original counterpart version run at the 12Mhz machine!! ... So do we need another one but with 64 tracks and VST? THERE ARE ALREADY THOSE.

The community of trackers is a small niche, the developers have a mentality like running a big factory and ignoring the request to have it also running on the retro platforms!! They compile their tracker which has minimum requirement atleast winXP, while the retro community uses the trackers most and use C64, DOS, Amiga instead. You can imagine that it is impossible to get the new software for such old platforms if even for WIN98SE support requst the developer says "no, get a win XP instead, get 64bit platform!".

Well I still hope the new version run at the WIN98SE too.
SO, if it shall be a retro thing then it shall run also for a retro platform (like FT2.10A ) and not only for the winXP/7/10, but never demanding 64bit system.


I still use the MT2.6.1 a lot, and with many synthesizers and modules with my hardware based studio, like someone uses it as a main sequencer. AND it works great with WIN98SE on my Pentium 4. And for a modern tracker its great. Yannick DID really something what Renoise could not! Renoise author said "its impossible to make such thing for win98se". So, congratiolations, Yannik!!


Still MT2.6.1 has many bugs and misses, for which the bugfixes got never released, I found the workarounds for it and using it today and I have arranged and composed several tunes, tracks, still today, after 13 years. Somewhat tedious but usable.
I use only the old software which run on these older machines, as after I tried the new moder sequencer and tracker software give up them and took back FT2.06 and MT2.6.1. again together with old Cubase VST32

Also I bought the professional licence for this MT2 software, while the webspace was the first one which was discontinued. Well, can live with it, still the development would be good and bugfixes done!


So, if it gets developed... toooo bad if the minimal requirement for MT3 is something which requires even newer platform.

The open source would be good idea. However the program shall be DOCUMENTED. Without proper documentation, flowcharts, RTL data, all the source code is rubbish and it will end up in a trashcan as one-mans-project anyway.

Still... I am coder myself too (asm,C, delphi), and... I am sick of these 100 000 line programs which have absolutely no effort for either documentation, flowcharts nor a good programming manners. Without the documentation every project is designed to be doomed. No one cant really make bugfixes to those projects nor get idea whats really going on. So, no wonder if becouse of this there are n+1 halffinished one-man-projects, becouse no one other understands it and it gets a way over the head of initial author too.
 Back to top
View user's journal Send private message
Reply to topic Post new topic  
Display posts from previous:   
Page 4 of 4 All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group

Copyright © 1998-2005 Yannick Delwiche
All rights reserved