With Muse Group's ownership and Tantacrul/Martin Keary as Head of Product of Audacity [0][1], Audacity will be moving in a radically different direction from a UI/UX perspective. I happen to think this will be a good thing, and I happen to think that (opt-in) telemetry is a perfectly good way of ensuring that a consumer-facing open-source project doesn't just build for its loudest users, especially in the context of large interface redesigns. And with MuseScore 4, the creative team struck what I think is a great balance between streamlining the interface and avoiding the removal of complexity/advanced features.
But I can also see why a fork can and should diverge, for those who want a more stable and slow-moving evolution of the software. I hope the Tenacity project succeeds!
> for those who want a more stable and slow-moving evolution of the software.
As I recall, Tenacity started with some significant reworking of the development toolchain. But I get your point: that's not something end-users normally care about.
Not sure about Tenacity's situation, but there are certainly ways in which development toolchains can be reworked to lend themselves towards predictable performance and reliable release management!
While true, this doesn't mean slow-moving evolution of the project. A project can have predictable toolchain performance and reliable release management and rewrite the whole thing every six months.
But I can also see why a fork can and should diverge, for those who want a more stable and slow-moving evolution of the software. I hope the Tenacity project succeeds!
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMWNvwLiXIQ
[1] https://uk.linkedin.com/in/martin-keary-88a5a7159