Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
19 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

James Crook
1453 (P2) is about Ghost plug-ins.
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1453


Bill's testing shows that 1453 has become more of a problem on Mac,
because of the movement of the plug-ins.  I've created a new bug for
this more serious aspect of 1453 that has arisen because the plug-ins
have moved inside the app.  It is Mac only.

http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1587


This bug could be fixed by abandoning the all in the app structure,
whereas 1453 could not.  However it seems to me to make more sense to
not show the ghosts.


1453 is a P2, but I did not consider it a blocker since not many effects
change between versions.
However all Nyquist effects on Mac now require going down one level in
the menu and ignoring the ghost after an upgrade.  The combination of
1587 and 1453 makes 1453 more serious in my (RMs) eyes, and so I'm
blocking on 1453 now.

I think 1453 and 1587 can be fixed together with one fix, which is to
run the code to test presence of plug-ins when constructing the effects
menu.  This will benefit Windows and Linux too.

There is a gold-plated fix possible, which is to flag the absent plug
ins in the effects list too - and even provide a way to select and
remove them from the list easily.  I don't intend to do that for 2.1.3.

I hope to get the necessary part of the fix done today.

--James.












------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Vaughan Johnson-4
Seems to be a lot of knotty issues for this release, especially OS
related. Blessings and thanks for your all's working these out. -- V

On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 3:41 AM, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 1453 (P2) is about Ghost plug-ins.
> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1453
>
>
> Bill's testing shows that 1453 has become more of a problem on Mac,
> because of the movement of the plug-ins.  I've created a new bug for
> this more serious aspect of 1453 that has arisen because the plug-ins
> have moved inside the app.  It is Mac only.
>
> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1587
>
>
> This bug could be fixed by abandoning the all in the app structure,
> whereas 1453 could not.  However it seems to me to make more sense to
> not show the ghosts.
>
>
> 1453 is a P2, but I did not consider it a blocker since not many effects
> change between versions.
> However all Nyquist effects on Mac now require going down one level in
> the menu and ignoring the ghost after an upgrade.  The combination of
> 1587 and 1453 makes 1453 more serious in my (RMs) eyes, and so I'm
> blocking on 1453 now.
>
> I think 1453 and 1587 can be fixed together with one fix, which is to
> run the code to test presence of plug-ins when constructing the effects
> menu.  This will benefit Windows and Linux too.
>
> There is a gold-plated fix possible, which is to flag the absent plug
> ins in the effects list too - and even provide a way to select and
> remove them from the list easily.  I don't intend to do that for 2.1.3.
>
> I hope to get the necessary part of the fix done today.
>
> --James.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by James Crook
James,

After your fix, won't the user still see the duplicates and have the extra
navigation into the cascading menu if they don't delete the old plugins?
Or are you adding an extra test specifically for shipped duplicates
somewhere in /Applications?

When all this is clear, I would like to adjust the Mac installation page in
the Manual again, given behaviour is changing. Agreed?

I agree we must not abandon all in one. Without it, any macOS upgrade
could cripple Audacity.

Testing for presence of the effects before user sees the Effect menu makes
sense to me, but how time expensive will the fix be if the user has
hundreds of effects? Will this happen on launch of Audacity or when user
clicks the Effect Menu?

I still don't like it much if this means a user who moves a plugin inside a
subfolder or accidentally deletes it now doesn't see it at all in the menu, so
has to go into Plug-in Manager to find out what is going on. IMO your bug
1587 is really an installer problem (cleaning up old effects) and would be
dealt with that way on the other platforms. This shows IMO why a .PKG
installer would give us more flexibility to deal with issues like this.

I assume James agrees what he calls the gold-plated solution is part of
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1018 . Directly removing
non-existent effects from the menus raises the importance of that bug, so
very likely it will now get promoted to P2.



Gale

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

James Crook
All of this subject to whether or not you (Gale) agree that
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1587 merits a P2.  If
it is P3 in your view then we don't need the fix.


On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
> James,
>
> After your fix, won't the user still see the duplicates and have the extra
> navigation into the cascading menu if they don't delete the old plugins?
Yes.
However those aren't ghosts, because the extra plug-ins really do
exist.  If users delete the old dmg - which typically they will if
replacing Audacity.app in ~/Applications/ then they will delete the
plug-ins too, and in the new scheme, not see (Ghost) duplicates.

> Or are you adding an extra test specifically for shipped duplicates
> somewhere in /Applications?
It's for Nyquist effects that aren't there any more.
They won't appear in the menu, they are useless there, but will still
appear in the add/remove page.

> When all this is clear, I would like to adjust the Mac installation page in
> the Manual again, given behaviour is changing. Agreed?
Yes, that's fine.

Apologies for not being on top of the duplicate nyquist plug-ins in menu
issue until now.  I see you have an explanation in the manual about it.  
I hadn't been aware that the change in structure had introduced this
problem.  (One reason for that is that 2.1.3 is the first release where
I've had a mac to try it on, so I didn't have an old 2.1.2 already
installed).


> I agree we must not abandon all in one. Without it, any macOS upgrade
> could cripple Audacity.
>
> Testing for presence of the effects before user sees the Effect menu makes
> sense to me, but how time expensive will the fix be if the user has
> hundreds of effects?
I'm concerned about the time too.
Current plan is to limit it to Nyquist.  There won't be 100's of those.
I might perhaps add SC4 as a special case.  Depends if that is easy or
tricky.

> Will this happen on launch of Audacity or when user
> clicks the Effect Menu?
On launch.

> I still don't like it much if this means a user who moves a plugin inside a
> subfolder or accidentally deletes it now doesn't see it at all in the menu, so
> has to go into Plug-in Manager to find out what is going on.
I don't think the user is losing anything.  If they move the plug-in the
entry in the menu is non functional.

> IMO your bug 1587 is really an installer problem (cleaning up old effects) and would be
> dealt with that way on the other platforms.
I disagree.  1587 is a more severe manifestation of 1453, a P2 which
affects all platforms.

> This shows IMO why a .PKG installer would give us more flexibility to deal with issues like this.
And contrary to you, IMO the connection between 1587 and 1453 shows that
it is a general Audacity problem that needs to be fixed in Audacity
itself, not in installers for each.


> I assume James agrees what he calls the gold-plated solution is part of
> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1018 .
Yes, I see 1018 as an enhancement bug where multiple issues /
possibilities are being considered.
> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.


--James.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
James, clearly you and I disagree about how to fix the problem, such
as it is. One way to see it is that 1587 should not have been created
and that the problem is really another aspect of 1018. At this late stage
of the release it is arguable that 1018 should not be higher than P3, as
long as we document the issue well (including on the Mac download
page). Please see my reply to your off list message about this.

I do now see value in informing the user that an effect is missing when
they access it in the Effect menu. I do think it is quite easy for a user
to accidentally lose access to a plugin and that is not user friendly to
silently remove a missing plugin from the menu, or to make user go
into Plug-in Manager to re-enable a plugin that otherwise they could
simply put it back in the right place in the file system.

Plus, if we only query existence of a plugin when we access it in the
menu, we don't have a potential issue of slowed up response when
accessing the menu, or slowed up launch of Audacity if the user has
hundreds of plugins.

I think this all needs discussing in more detail and amongst more of us
than we have time for now. So for 2.1.3, if we make changes, I see the
ideal approach if possible as doing nothing except:

* Remove the known shipped duplicates from the menus on Mac
  (don't remove all Nyquist duplicates that there may be on all platforms,
  if that was what you meant). Merely removing the "ghost" plugins
  is to me only part of the problem. The actual problem is the duplicates
  themselves (repeated extra navigation). It may take the user quite a
  while to figure they now have a redundant old Audacity folder then
  remove it.

* Remove from the Effect menu other known plugins that we no longer
  ship (bug 1453, Hard Limiter and Leveller).

Given my view about the possible benefits of generally not removing
non-existent plugins from the menus, I do still see the bullet points
above as an installation-time problem, unlike yourself.



Gale


On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:

> All of this subject to whether or not you (Gale) agree that
> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1587 merits a P2.  If
> it is P3 in your view then we don't need the fix.
>
>
> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>> James,
>>
>> After your fix, won't the user still see the duplicates and have the extra
>> naigation into the cascading menu if they don't delete the old plugins?
> Yes.
> However those aren't ghosts, because the extra plug-ins really do
> exist.  If users delete the old dmg - which typically they will if
> replacing Audacity.app in ~/Applications/ then they will delete the
> plug-ins too, and in the new scheme, not see (Ghost) duplicates.
>
>> Or are you adding an extra test specifically for shipped duplicates
>> somewhere in /Applications?
> It's for Nyquist effects that aren't there any more.
> They won't appear in the menu, they are useless there, but will still
> appear in the add/remove page.
>
>> When all this is clear, I would like to adjust the Mac installation page in
>> the Manual again, given behaviour is changing. Agreed?
> Yes, that's fine.
>
> Apologies for not being on top of the duplicate nyquist plug-ins in menu
> issue until now.  I see you have an explanation in the manual about it.
> I hadn't been aware that the change in structure had introduced this
> problem.  (One reason for that is that 2.1.3 is the first release where
> I've had a mac to try it on, so I didn't have an old 2.1.2 already
> installed).
>
>
>> I agree we must not abandon all in one. Without it, any macOS upgrade
>> could cripple Audacity.
>>
>> Testing for presence of the effects before user sees the Effect menu makes
>> sense to me, but how time expensive will the fix be if the user has
>> hundreds of effects?
> I'm concerned about the time too.
> Current plan is to limit it to Nyquist.  There won't be 100's of those.
> I might perhaps add SC4 as a special case.  Depends if that is easy or
> tricky.
>
>> Will this happen on launch of Audacity or when user
>> clicks the Effect Menu?
> On launch.
>
>> I still don't like it much if this means a user who moves a plugin inside a
>> subfolder or accidentally deletes it now doesn't see it at all in the menu, so
>> has to go into Plug-in Manager to find out what is going on.
> I don't think the user is losing anything.  If they move the plug-in the
> entry in the menu is non functional.
>
>> IMO your bug 1587 is really an installer problem (cleaning up old effects) and would be
>> dealt with that way on the other platforms.
> I disagree.  1587 is a more severe manifestation of 1453, a P2 which
> affects all platforms.
>
>> This shows IMO why a .PKG installer would give us more flexibility to deal with issues like this.
> And contrary to you, IMO the connection between 1587 and 1453 shows that
> it is a general Audacity problem that needs to be fixed in Audacity
> itself, not in installers for each.
>
>
>> I assume James agrees what he calls the gold-plated solution is part of
>> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1018 .
> Yes, I see 1018 as an enhancement bug where multiple issues /
> possibilities are being considered.
>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>
>
> --James.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by James Crook
On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
[...]
>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
> > importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.

FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
"Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
that by definition.

I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
at some point.


Gale

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

James Crook
I'm working on a fix for 1587 that removes Nyquist ghost plug ins so
that they do not appear in the menu.

If you think 1587 is not as serious as I do, then I'd be totally OK with
you downgrading it from my P2 to P3.  If you do, then we can proceed by
renaming jc11s to RC1 and proceed on the path to release.

--James.


On 2/5/2017 5:56 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:

> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
> [...]
>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
> that by definition.
>
> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
> at some point.
>
>
> Gale


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Bill Wharrie
In reply to this post by Gale
I am in favour of removing non-existent plugins from the menus and the Manager. If this can be done without unduly affecting launch time then do it. If it slows down launch too much then we’ll have to find another solution.

I don’t see any upside to keeping non-existent plugins in the menu and Manager. If the user accidentally trashed or moved them, then it is to be expected that they will be gone. If the user puts them back then it is no great burden to open the Plugin Manager and enable them. IMO it is worse to show non-existent effects and then put up a totally unhelpful error message ("failed to initialize”).

I think it makes us look a bit amateurish to provide menu choices for plugins that do not exist.

As for the duplicate (but working) effects, that is less clear and IMO can be left to 2.1.4.

Peter?  Steve?

— Bill

> On 2017/02/05, at 12:56 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
> [...]
>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>
> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
> that by definition.
>
> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
> at some point.
>
>
> Gale
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

James Crook
In reply to this post by James Crook
Update:

I've written the fix, but in view of
> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at launch,
I am assuming Gale would not see it as an improvement, and possibly as
making things worse - because that is what my fix does (for Nyquist
effects).  Gale also says that possible fixes need further discussion.

So that we can move forward, I have marked 1587 as P3 (and 1580 back to
P2).  jc11 can be renamed as RC1 and we can move forward towards release.

--James.


On 2/5/2017 6:15 PM, James Crook wrote:

> I'm working on a fix for 1587 that removes Nyquist ghost plug ins so
> that they do not appear in the menu.
>
> If you think 1587 is not as serious as I do, then I'd be totally OK with
> you downgrading it from my P2 to P3.  If you do, then we can proceed by
> renaming jc11s to RC1 and proceed on the path to release.
>
> --James.
>
>
> On 2/5/2017 5:56 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
>> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
>> that by definition.
>>
>> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
>> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
>> at some point.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
On 5 February 2017 at 18:38, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
[...]
>  jc11 can be renamed as RC1 and we can move forward towards release.

So in that case we let the SC4 docs problem in the Manual through?
I suppose we can just about live with that, given it wasn't noted before.

Perhaps we might mention it in one of those yellow boxes at the top of
the release notes.


Gale

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

James Crook
On 2/5/2017 8:25 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
> On 5 February 2017 at 18:38, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
> [...]
>>   jc11 can be renamed as RC1 and we can move forward towards release.
> So in that case we let the SC4 docs problem in the Manual through?
> I suppose we can just about live with that, given it wasn't noted before.
>
> Perhaps we might mention it in one of those yellow boxes at the top of
> the release notes.
Yes.  Yellow box in release notes is OK.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by James Crook
On 5 February 2017 at 18:38, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Update:
>
> I've written the fix, but in view of
>> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at launch,
> I am assuming Gale would not see it as an improvement, and possibly as
> making things worse - because that is what my fix does (for Nyquist
> effects).

Probably I would think it worse if this targets all non-existent Nyquist
effects and not the specific duplicates in /Applications.  If nothing else,
it's inconsistent per different plugin type.


>  Gale also says that possible fixes need further discussion.

It looks that way to me unless the duplicates are such a problem that
we must make a rushed decision on handling missing effects.

It's unfortunate that we have not discussed the duplicates before now
but I have not yet seen any unambiguous support for James blocking
on it. I thought we had simply decided to live with it as "expected".


Gale

> So that we can move forward, I have marked 1587 as P3 (and 1580 back to
> P2).  jc11 can be renamed as RC1 and we can move forward towards release.
>
> --James.
>
>
> On 2/5/2017 6:15 PM, James Crook wrote:
>> I'm working on a fix for 1587 that removes Nyquist ghost plug ins so
>> that they do not appear in the menu.
>>
>> If you think 1587 is not as serious as I do, then I'd be totally OK with
>> you downgrading it from my P2 to P3.  If you do, then we can proceed by
>> renaming jc11s to RC1 and proceed on the path to release.
>>
>> --James.
>>
>>
>> On 2/5/2017 5:56 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>>>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>>>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>>>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>>> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
>>> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
>>> that by definition.
>>>
>>> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
>>> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
>>> at some point.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Bill Wharrie
On 5 February 2017 at 18:28, Bill Wharrie <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I am in favour of removing non-existent plugins from the menus and the Manager. If this can be done without unduly affecting launch time then do it. If it slows down launch too much then we’ll have to find another solution.
>
> I don’t see any upside to keeping non-existent plugins in the menu and Manager. If the user accidentally trashed or moved them, then it is to be expected that they will be gone.

It might be expected by us, but not by the user. They won't know what
they've done. It could look like another "disappearing plugins" bug.

> If the user puts them back then it is no great burden to open the Plugin Manager and enable them. IMO it is worse to show non-existent effects and then put up a totally unhelpful error message ("failed to initialize”).

I totally agree on that. I've suggested if we merely check for a plugin's
existence on accessing it, we must explicitly say that it is missing.


> I think it makes us look a bit amateurish to provide menu choices for plugins
> that do not exist.

I think that depends how we handle the absentee plugins. What I don't care
for is silently removing them.

If we scan for all absentees on launch then indicate that some plugins
no longer exist (like we say on launch that FFmpeg can no longer be
found) then I may change my mind.

Audacity on Windows already takes up to 40 seconds to launch for
me and many others (yes a spinning HDD might not help). I am not
keen on any significant extensions to that launch time.


> As for the duplicate (but working) effects, that is less clear and IMO can be left to 2.1.4.

What about the duplicate non-working effects? Do you Bill think we should
block on it? As I see it the user knows they have deliberately deleted the
old Audacity installation folder, and they can see the plugin that fails is
the one that is in the path they deleted.



Gale


> Peter?  Steve?
>
> — Bill
>
>> On 2017/02/05, at 12:56 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>>
>> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
>> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
>> that by definition.
>>
>> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
>> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
>> at some point.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Peter Sampson-2
In reply to this post by Bill Wharrie


On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Bill Wharrie <[hidden email]> wrote:
I am in favour of removing non-existent plugins from the menus and the Manager. If this can be done without unduly affecting launch time then do it.

+1

Im with Bill here

 
If it slows down launch too much then we’ll have to find another solution.

+1 to this - it is now over a year since we have had a release, plus we have done no
real development for many maonths now

 

I don’t see any upside to keeping non-existent plugins in the menu and Manager. If the user accidentally trashed or moved them, then it is to be expected that they will be gone. If the user puts them back then it is no great burden to open the Plugin Manager and enable them. IMO it is worse to show non-existent effects and then put up a totally unhelpful error message ("failed to initialize”).

+1 to this too
 

I think it makes us look a bit amateurish to provide menu choices for plugins that do not exist.

I can't disagree with that.
 

As for the duplicate (but working) effects, that is less clear and IMO can be left to 2.1.4.

Agreed.
 

Peter?  Steve?

— Bill

> On 2017/02/05, at 12:56 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
> [...]
>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>
> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
> that by definition.
>
> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
> at some point.
>
>
> Gale
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Peter Sampson-2
I just did some testing on my Macbook Pro Sierra 10.12.3

1)  Purged the Mac of Audacity

2) Installed 2.1.2
Curiously no Nyquist effects found

3)Installed jc11 2.1.3 without rmoving 2.1.2
3.1) I now have the Audacity folder in Applications folder (containing 2.1.2)
AND the Audacity.app in Applications (containing 2.1.3)
Of course I did not get the customory overwrite message when installing
a new version over an existing one.

3.2) All Nyquist effects present and correct

3.3) No duplicate effects whatsoever

3.4) Yes, SC4 is not loaded for action, but is in the New list and is very easy
to activate (and easy to tell inexperienced uses how to do it, in say the
Release Notes and a Forum sticky).
Qn:  how well-used is SC4 anyway, is it tha important an effect?


4) Then the curious bit - I closed jc11 2.1.3 and resopened 2.1.2
This time in 2.1.2 all the Nyquist effects were now present and correct
and no duplicate effects present
SC4 still now in the "New" state


So my test of an upgrading from 2.1.2 yo a putative 2.1.3 would have the user
a) not seeing SC4 activated - but it is there
b) being left with the (probably/possibly) unneeded Audacity folder with 2.1.2

Otherwise jc11  looks perfectly workable on my Mac as an upgrader and as a
first-time virgin installer.

Peter

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Stevethefiddle
In reply to this post by Gale


On 5 February 2017 at 20:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 5 February 2017 at 18:28, Bill Wharrie <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I am in favour of removing non-existent plugins from the menus and the Manager. If this can be done without unduly affecting launch time then do it. If it slows down launch too much then we’ll have to find another solution.
>
> I don’t see any upside to keeping non-existent plugins in the menu and Manager. If the user accidentally trashed or moved them, then it is to be expected that they will be gone.

It might be expected by us, but not by the user. They won't know what
they've done. It could look like another "disappearing plugins" bug.

As a user, I'd not expect plug-ins to be listed if they don't exist. I have used software that only updates its plug-in list on manually "rescanning", and it is highly confusing (for users) to see non-existent plug-ins listed as if they exist.
 

> If the user puts them back then it is no great burden to open the Plugin Manager and enable them. IMO it is worse to show non-existent effects and then put up a totally unhelpful error message ("failed to initialize”).

I totally agree on that. I've suggested if we merely check for a plugin's
existence on accessing it, we must explicitly say that it is missing.

I'm not clear when you expect that to happen.
If you mean that non-existent plug-ins should be listed, then put up an error message when the user tries to use the non-existent plug-in, then I'm -1.

If you mean that if Audacity updates its list of plug-ins 'behind the curtains', that it should inform the user if it removes plug-ins from its list, then that would seem reasonable. I've not had time to follow the recent Mac changes in detail, so I'm not sure exactly what happens now or what is being proposed.



> I think it makes us look a bit amateurish to provide menu choices for plugins
> that do not exist.

I think that depends how we handle the absentee plugins. What I don't care
for is silently removing them.

If we scan for all absentees on launch then indicate that some plugins
no longer exist (like we say on launch that FFmpeg can no longer be
found) then I may change my mind.

Audacity on Windows already takes up to 40 seconds to launch for
me and many others (yes a spinning HDD might not help). I am not
keen on any significant extensions to that launch time.


> As for the duplicate (but working) effects, that is less clear and IMO can be left to 2.1.4.

What about the duplicate non-working effects? Do you Bill think we should
block on it? As I see it the user knows they have deliberately deleted the
old Audacity installation folder, and they can see the plugin that fails is
the one that is in the path they deleted.



Gale


> Peter?  Steve?
>
> — Bill
>
>> On 2017/02/05, at 12:56 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to P2.
>>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect add/remove
>>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>>
>> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
>> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
>> that by definition.
>>
>> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus at
>> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it too
>> at some point.

If we scan and remove non-existent plug-ins on launch, then I think it would be useful to inform the user about what has happened.
If we scan and remove non-existent plug-ins on launch and do not inform the user, then I think a "P2/P3 enh" for Audacity to inform the user would be appropriate.

Getting this right for all effects looks complex, so I don't think we should rush a fix, and I don't think we should block the release on it. I do support to tracking this issue closely and giving high priority to developing a comprehensive fix.

Steve

 
>>
>>
>> Gale



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Cliff Scott
In reply to this post by Peter Sampson-2

> On Feb 6, 2017, at 6:16 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I just did some testing on my Macbook Pro Sierra 10.12.3
>
> 1)  Purged the Mac of Audacity
>
> 2) Installed 2.1.2
> Curiously no Nyquist effects found
>
> 3)Installed jc11 2.1.3 without rmoving 2.1.2
> 3.1) I now have the Audacity folder in Applications folder (containing 2.1.2)
> AND the Audacity.app in Applications (containing 2.1.3)
> Of course I did not get the customory overwrite message when installing
> a new version over an existing one.
>
> 3.2) All Nyquist effects present and correct
>
> 3.3) No duplicate effects whatsoever
>
> 3.4) Yes, SC4 is not loaded for action, but is in the New list and is very easy
> to activate (and easy to tell inexperienced uses how to do it, in say the
> Release Notes and a Forum sticky).
> Qn:  how well-used is SC4 anyway, is it tha important an effect?
>
>
> 4) Then the curious bit - I closed jc11 2.1.3 and resopened 2.1.2
> This time in 2.1.2 all the Nyquist effects were now present and correct
> and no duplicate effects present
> SC4 still now in the "New" state

I suspect the reason you didn't get duplicates is the Gatekeeper locked the ones from 2.1.2 up. On my system which has 2.1.2. installed in a previous OS version Gatekeeper doesn't bother with them so I get duplicates. This is most likely what most people will see since Sierra hasn't been out that long.

Cliff

>
>
> So my test of an upgrading from 2.1.2 yo a putative 2.1.3 would have the user
> a) not seeing SC4 activated - but it is there
> b) being left with the (probably/possibly) unneeded Audacity folder with 2.1.2
>
> Otherwise jc11  looks perfectly workable on my Mac as an upgrader and as a
> first-time virgin installer.
>
> Peter
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Stevethefiddle
On 6 February 2017 at 12:52, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On 5 February 2017 at 20:58, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 5 February 2017 at 18:28, Bill Wharrie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > I am in favour of removing non-existent plugins from the menus and the
>> > Manager. If this can be done without unduly affecting launch time then do
>> > it. If it slows down launch too much then we’ll have to find another
>> > solution.
>> >
>> > I don’t see any upside to keeping non-existent plugins in the menu and
>> > Manager. If the user accidentally trashed or moved them, then it is to be
>> > expected that they will be gone.
>>
>> It might be expected by us, but not by the user. They won't know what
>> they've done. It could look like another "disappearing plugins" bug.
>
>
> As a user, I'd not expect plug-ins to be listed if they don't exist. I have
> used software that only updates its plug-in list on manually "rescanning",
> and it is highly confusing (for users) to see non-existent plug-ins listed
> as if they exist.
>
>>
>>
>> > If the user puts them back then it is no great burden to open the Plugin
>> > Manager and enable them. IMO it is worse to show non-existent effects and
>> > then put up a totally unhelpful error message ("failed to initialize”).
>>
>> I totally agree on that. I've suggested if we merely check for a plugin's
>> existence on accessing it, we must explicitly say that it is missing.
>
>
> I'm not clear when you expect that to happen.
> If you mean that non-existent plug-ins should be listed, then put up an
> error message when the user tries to use the non-existent plug-in, then I'm
> -1.

It depends how we were to do that, though it seems we won't be doing
it unless Audacity launch is delayed too much by the existence check.

I assume the simplest (but I agree least desirable) is to show the effect
in the menu as now, then clicking it gives an error message.

It may not be possible to do something better, like

* show the effect with a line through (or in red)
* add "missing" to what screen readers say
* show the expected path as a hover tooltip (I know we can show
  the path by opening a sub menu).


> If you mean that if Audacity updates its list of plug-ins 'behind the
> curtains', that it should inform the user if it removes plug-ins from its
> list, then that would seem reasonable.

Yes I think that information absolutely should be given if we update the
menus "behind the curtains".  For helping a user who accidentally
causes Audacity to no longer detect a plugin, this is as good as or
better than showing the plugin in the menu.

We could then in the info message give the path to the plugin and say
what action Plug-in Manager has taken on the item(s).

I still argue it would be easier for Plug-in Manager not to deregister
or disable accidentally undetected plugins, just mark them as
"missing", allowing the user to put the plugin back without going into
Plug-in Manager. But if it is necessary to use a global disable or
deregister to remove old shipped plugins from the menus, then I
think all users will have to go into Plug-in Manager to re-enable.



Gale


> I've not had time to follow the recent Mac changes in detail, so I'm not
> sure exactly what happens now or what is being proposed.
>
>>
>>
>> > I think it makes us look a bit amateurish to provide menu choices for
>> > plugins
>> > that do not exist.
>>
>> I think that depends how we handle the absentee plugins. What I don't care
>> for is silently removing them.
>>
>> If we scan for all absentees on launch then indicate that some plugins
>> no longer exist (like we say on launch that FFmpeg can no longer be
>> found) then I may change my mind.
>>
>> Audacity on Windows already takes up to 40 seconds to launch for
>> me and many others (yes a spinning HDD might not help). I am not
>> keen on any significant extensions to that launch time.
>>
>>
>> > As for the duplicate (but working) effects, that is less clear and IMO
>> > can be left to 2.1.4.
>>
>> What about the duplicate non-working effects? Do you Bill think we should
>> block on it? As I see it the user knows they have deliberately deleted the
>> old Audacity installation folder, and they can see the plugin that fails
>> is
>> the one that is in the path they deleted.
>>
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> > Peter?  Steve?
>> >
>> > — Bill
>> >
>> >> On 2017/02/05, at 12:56 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 5 February 2017 at 15:16, James Crook <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>> On 2/5/2017 2:13 PM, Gale Andrews wrote:
>> >> [...]
>> >>>> Directly removing non-existent effects from the menus raises the
>> >>>> importance of that bug, so very likely it will now get promoted to
>> >>>> P2.
>> >>> That sounds like support for Bill's proposal that the effect
>> >>> add/remove
>> >>> dialog should have a 'Not-There'/'Gone' state for items. Sounds like a
>> >>> viable approach.  Let's add 1018 to our try out on q2a list.
>> >>
>> >> FWIW, it was I who suggested Plug-In Manager should have a
>> >> "Missing" category, in response to Bill's concerns. So yes I support
>> >> that by definition.
>> >>
>> >> I currently question removing all non-existent effects from the menus
>> >> at
>> >> launch, though it would be good to hear Bill's and others take on it
>> >> too
>> >> at some point.
>
>
> If we scan and remove non-existent plug-ins on launch, then I think it would
> be useful to inform the user about what has happened.
> If we scan and remove non-existent plug-ins on launch and do not inform the
> user, then I think a "P2/P3 enh" for Audacity to inform the user would be
> appropriate.
>
> Getting this right for all effects looks complex, so I don't think we should
> rush a fix, and I don't think we should block the release on it. I do
> support to tracking this issue closely and giving high priority to
> developing a comprehensive fix.
>
> Steve
>
>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Gale
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Pause before RC1 for Ghost plug-ins

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Cliff Scott
Yes, it could be that some Sierra machines won't show duplicate
shipped effects on upgrading from 2.1.2 to 2.1.3.

Still I expect most will show duplicates. I still think bug 1567 does not
occur on all Sierra machines even in 2.1.2, and where it does, at least
some users will presumably have discovered xattr to re-enable the
plugins.


Gale


On 6 February 2017 at 13:02, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>> On Feb 6, 2017, at 6:16 AM, Peter Sampson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I just did some testing on my Macbook Pro Sierra 10.12.3
>>
>> 1)  Purged the Mac of Audacity
>>
>> 2) Installed 2.1.2
>> Curiously no Nyquist effects found
>>
>> 3)Installed jc11 2.1.3 without rmoving 2.1.2
>> 3.1) I now have the Audacity folder in Applications folder (containing 2.1.2)
>> AND the Audacity.app in Applications (containing 2.1.3)
>> Of course I did not get the customory overwrite message when installing
>> a new version over an existing one.
>>
>> 3.2) All Nyquist effects present and correct
>>
>> 3.3) No duplicate effects whatsoever
>>
>> 3.4) Yes, SC4 is not loaded for action, but is in the New list and is very easy
>> to activate (and easy to tell inexperienced uses how to do it, in say the
>> Release Notes and a Forum sticky).
>> Qn:  how well-used is SC4 anyway, is it tha important an effect?
>>
>>
>> 4) Then the curious bit - I closed jc11 2.1.3 and resopened 2.1.2
>> This time in 2.1.2 all the Nyquist effects were now present and correct
>> and no duplicate effects present
>> SC4 still now in the "New" state
>
> I suspect the reason you didn't get duplicates is the Gatekeeper locked the ones from 2.1.2 up. On my system which has 2.1.2. installed in a previous OS version Gatekeeper doesn't bother with them so I get duplicates. This is most likely what most people will see since Sierra hasn't been out that long.
>
> Cliff
>
>>
>>
>> So my test of an upgrading from 2.1.2 yo a putative 2.1.3 would have the user
>> a) not seeing SC4 activated - but it is there
>> b) being left with the (probably/possibly) unneeded Audacity folder with 2.1.2
>>
>> Otherwise jc11  looks perfectly workable on my Mac as an upgrader and as a
>> first-time virgin installer.
>>
>> Peter
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Loading...