Why so pessimistic?
The ideas/brainstorming about an arranger indeed exists as long as Renoise exists. I can actually remember adding an arranger was my first idea when I started to extend the old NoiseTrekker sources.
There has been done a lot of work been done in planing, yes, but nothing is really settled. If it would, you would already see it implemented.
As Pysj already pointed out, we currently take care of the speed/resolution issue. This is a fundamental thing which IMHO has to be solved before putting another level of complexity with the arranger on top.
So, yes, we still need your help with the Arranger!
I dont fear the coding, I fear the concept which is still not yet settled. Yes, even after 12 pages in this forum topic and all the years I still think we are not yet ready and don’t know what exactly we want/need.
You guys are talking about “coding” all the time. Thats really the smallest problem at the end. “Feature Design” is what we need first: http://www.renoise.com/board/index.php?showforum=31
You dont need to know about any Renoise internals. This is a ideas & suggestions forum, not a “how can we code these ideas & suggestions” forum. I say it again: Everything is possible. If there is codebase missing for something we want as its THE solution for the problem - not a half-assed compromized solution that maybe can be done in half the time, well, then we have to implant this codebase first and then do it.
We are not in the situation that we have customer that bought features that have to be ready in a strict timing plan, so we dont have to apply all the limitations that are implied with this way of working. Do you want any Arranger or THE Arranger?
Now thats something. Thanks Danoise!
Most of my concerns are already pointed out by Pysj, so let me go a step back, trying to organize things a bit:
We first need to decide some rough guidelines for an Arranger before going into the details. Basically there are 2 ways of integrating such a thing into Renoise:
2b) As proposed by Pysj (and others). We add a new arranger on top of what we’ve got now. This would be a new tab like the mixer which simply allows you to arrange the components we already have now. it would be a dedicated view with its own shortcuts and editing methods.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages, so I think we should continue the discussion by splitting it into two parts. Discussing each alternative in detail, then choose the best of the two at the end.
So how to continue with this arranger topic?
As said above, I think we need two separate designs, one for 2a, one for 2b, then finally !unpin this messy thread! and go into details in the feature design forum.
Danoise: May I aks you to take care of putting your Idea into the design forum? You would then be the main responsible for that idea - leading the discussions.
Pysj: May I ask you to do a feature draft for 2b?
Most important is IMHO, as Danoise did it, to start with a graphical overview of how this would look alike. This is the easiest way to give people an impression of your idea. Then details should follow in text form.
The details could be discussed in topics within the Feature Design forum.
See https://forum.renoise.com/t/organizing-ideas-suggestions-feature-design-forum/20022 for more details about the Feature Design forum - how it was planed to work.
Thanks. Thats exactly the kind of constructive feedback we need to make progress.