retitle 1077944 FAQ: musescore4 packaging tags 1077944 = wontfix thanks Hi Tuxicoman,
>I wonder if Musescore 4 will be packaged in Debian or if there are any concerns >preventing it ? yes, there are concerns. They’ve arrived too late for bookworm, but the https://packages.debian.org/sid/musescore3 current description of the package documents them: Mu͒seScore Studio 4 relies on proprietary, binary-only downloadable content for most functionality, so no Debian package is currently planned for the releases by the new (Muse Group) owners. As Mu͒seScore Studio 2 and 3 packager, I won’t stand in the way of others wanting to package 4, however I believe it will be a disservice to users because they w̲i̲l̲l̲ be wanting those proprietary plugins, as the “core” functionality (e.g. playback) otherwise is w̲o̲r̲s̲e̲ than in 3, plus I have vague concerns, sometimes more, sometimes less, regarding the new owners, their development process, amount of community involve‐ ment, etc. and being involved in various musicians’ fora, I see quite an amount of users unhappy with 4.x I’ll personally keep musescore2, musescore3 and musescore-snapshot (which will soon be a package of Mu͒seScore Evolution 3.7, a true community effort) working, and the different versions are coïnstallable anyway (because you need 2.x to work on a 2.x score, etc., to avoid having to invest h̲o̲u̲r̲s̲ to relayout for the new version). Any 4.x packager would do well to ensure to keep the proprietary content, telemetry, and other phone-home content (such as the start centre loading a webpage controlled by upstream that contains Yandex, Google, etc. trackers) patched out (a neverending battle). As I see this becoming a FAQ, I’ll keep this “bugreport” open. bye, //mirabilos -- <igli> exceptions: a truly awful implementation of quite a nice idea. <igli> just about the worst way you could do something like that, afaic. <igli> it's like anti-design. <mirabilos> that too… may I quote you on that? <igli> sure, tho i doubt anyone will listen ;)
