That’s not how open source works. It may be forked, and the fork may die, but that doesn’t change anything.
People seem to think that when you release source code you lose control of your project, that’s not true. Renoise could be open source but still not one line of code from anyone other than the current devs could make it into the application. It’s their project. They don’t have to include anyone else’s contributions if they don’t want to.
Good point.
But what would prevent somebody from “stealing” Renoise and recompile it into a new product, if it was 100% open source? Some license model? I like the open source idea if it’s limited to just some aspects of the software, as in modules and their separate API’s. However, I often get the impression that people who wish Renoise to be open source also imply that Renoise as a project should be divergent and that multiple compiled versions of it should be possible, not just some official version.
Nothing. See Red Hat Enterprise and Cent OS.
Generally businesses that develop OSS sell a service or live off donations or find some other way to finance the project. I imagine it would be tough for the Renoise team to do this as they are accustomed to their current methods and cash flow. Still, I’d love to see Renoise go open source one day. If the project ever dies and development stops I think the code should be released for the people to continue to maintain and use. Renoise is a great application, I’d hate to see it die with the company.
I’m pretty sure that if taktik would ever wish to leave the Renoise project (and there could be many valid reasons for such a decision, and this has happened in the past with martinal leaving as coder when Renoise was still a baby, and 3rd party tool makers and Renoise team members such as Bantai just disappering from the forum without any notice), he would probably first check with dblue and the other developers if they would be able and willing to maintain the project. If Renoise as a company would die, I’m pretty sure they would be gentlemen and distribute the source code as well. After all, that’s how Renoise started, with code from NoiseTrekker.
That I didn’t know! Very cool 
Indeed:
It always frustrates me when people sell FOSS. It’s legal (with most common OSS licences), but I feel bad for the poor suckers who bought it.
are we there yet ? 
I’m pretty sure there’s a bit of asm here and there for some optimization needs
There are currently 7817 alpha testers who are enjoying Renoise 3.0. You, me, and 15 other guys are not among them. Sorry.
I first read it as “ass” and so I was shocked at your comment. It would be interesting to know which is the best coder in regard to assembler/assembly among the Renoise devs though. Remember the days when coding was like:
mov ax,0b800h
mov es,ax
xor di,di
etc… and that xor di,di was actually saving a few cycles on a 486 CPU as opposed to mov di,0? Ah, those were the days! 
I think they should rewrite Renoise in Intercal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL#Hello.2C_world
So, it’s been about 2 months…any updates on ETA for beta, or confirmed new features?
Just imagine blizzard is making it. The ETA is Soon™, and it’s been confirmed to have awesome new features.
One of the most awesome and much demanded features is the fresh new Renoise assistant:
Great idea! Instead of a clip though it should be a staff on a note sheet 
“just takes a while”
meanwhile release screnshot, info , anything more than nothing…
Renoise = Win
Renoise = Win + Mac + Lin
Renoise 3.0 = Win + Mac + Lin + Droid! 
no. why? just, no.
Renoise devs have almost always followed the “surprise, it’s xmas, your birthday and new year rolled into one!” -method. just because you can’t be patient and wait for them to reveal it when it’s ready, doesn’t mean that they should change the way they act about new features, information about new releases and introductory videos.