63
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 13:
Line 13: − + + + + + + +
Refactoring Zynthians factory soundfont library (view source)
Revision as of 12:45, 26 February 2026
, 26 Februaryno edit summary
===Pulling upstream soundfont libraries vs. hosting own repository vs. hybrid approach===
===Pulling upstream soundfont libraries vs. hosting own repository vs. hybrid approach===
The ongoing discussion is about using upstream libraries maintained in other sources vs. hosting an own copy of a set of soundfonts, e.g. on Github. Up to now the soundfonts are distributed together with the ZynthianOS image. The question is where to store the storage intense sample files.
The ongoing discussion is about using upstream libraries maintained in other sources vs. hosting an own copy of a set of soundfonts, e.g. on Github. Up to now the soundfonts are distributed together with the ZynthianOS image. The question is where to store the storage intense sample files. Here is what speaks for one or the other option:
====Pro own repository====
Any kind of Zynthian specific adaption can be done directly (engine compatibility, UI integration, folder structure, just to name a few, adapt complexity to groovebox needs). We might not send these Zynthian specific changes back upstream anyway. Many good soundfonts are either not on github or other syncable repositories or just contain scripts without sample files. We could add ND licensed third party libraries as submodules.
====Pro pulling upstream====
There are well maintained libraries already on Github. Fixes can be exchanged both ways. It doesn't add to the storage capacities of Zynthian.org.
==Licenses: What are issues with script and sample licensing?==
==Licenses: What are issues with script and sample licensing?==