Bring vocoder upstream into SWH plugins

[tresf]

We've historically put the vocoder plugin into our plugins/LadspaEffect/swh directory for (likely) ease of building and bundling, but it's technically not an swh plugin which has lead people install LMMS just to get access to it.

I've asked Steve Harris (swh) as well as the Vocoder maintainer (Settle) and gotten the green light to actually put Vocoder in the swh upstream repo.

Since the vocoder page lists us as the binary distribution, I'm making a task to correct this inaccuracy by submitting the code upstream.

The code is here: https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/blob/master/plugins/LadspaEffect/swh/vocoder_1337.c

---

Original bug report

For some strange reason we have a non-SWH LADSPA plugin in our plugins/swh folder. This surfaced after a Debian user went to the vocoder home page, saw LMMS provides it and then installed LMMS per site instructions.

Since LMMS intentionally doesn't place LADSPA plugins in the root directory, the user couldn't use it in certain DAWs. The #lmms channel on IRC had some good (albeit heated) discussion on where this should live (or should Debian just package and provide this as a stand-alone) and it was decided that we should at least move it from the /plugins/swh folder unless a decision is reached between authors.

In the mean time, I've put out a request for inclusion to the authors. A copy of the email is below.

-Tres

Achim/Steve,

I'm emailing on behalf of the LMMS dev team...

It looks like a fairly popular vocoder plugin has been mis-categorized in our "swh" tree due to a poor decision made some time ago (before my involvement in the project).

https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/blob/master/plugins/LadspaEffect/swh/vocoder_1337.c

This isn't originally part of the Steve Harris "swh" LADSPA plugins, but it appears some Debian users are interested in obtaining a package for it and Achim's page refers to LMMS which doesn't provide it in the normal LADSPA install location.

Would you two be opposed to incorporating this into swh? If not, should we just tell Debian to package it themselves? Here's the bug report that started the convo...

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758888

Whatever the decision, thanks for the great work! :)
-Tres

[tresf]

Steve Harris responded already:

That’s fine as far as I’m concerned - the only issue is that it might not be trivial to incorporate, and I’ve very short of time.

Waiting to hear from Achim and if it is also a yes, try to figure out how much work we just signed ourselves up for. :)

Edit:

Achim responded as well:

Absolutely not opposed, do it!
bye,
Settel

[tresf]

FYI - Initial conversion has been started here: https://github.com/tresf/ladspa/blob/vocoder/vocoder_1337.xml

[tresf]

Initial port check... FYI, upstream is still here: https://github.com/tresf/ladspa/blob/vocoder/vocoder_1337.xml

Before (Current version, Vocoder for LMMS):

After (New swh version, Vocoder):

Initial testing is a failure...

../target/bin/lmms: symbol lookup error: 
   /home/ubuntu/lmms/target/lib/lmms/ladspa/vocoder_1337.so: 
   undefined symbol: doBandpasses

[jasp00]

The converted plugin works. I hope there are no licensing problems: the program from Achim Settelmeier is GPL-2+, which is compatible with SWH, but the version in LMMS is GPL-3+.

[tresf]

I received written permission from both plugin authors via #2366 (comment). If you're overly concerned with the license, I'd be happy to reach out again.

[tresf]

The converted plugin works.

Did you do some more work on it? Mine wasn't working when I last tested per tail end of #2366 (comment):

Initial testing is a failure...

../target/bin/lmms: symbol lookup error: 
   /home/ubuntu/lmms/target/lib/lmms/ladspa/vocoder_1337.so: 
   undefined symbol: doBandpasses

[jasp00]

If you're overly concerned with the license, I'd be happy to reach out again.

I believe Hexasoft is the only one missing to ask.

Did you do some more work on it?

Yes, although I did not get any symbol lookup error. I have made the pull request to SWH.

[tresf]

swh/ladspa#28 👍

[tresf]

I believe Hexasoft is the only one missing to ask.

I don't understand, Hexasoft is listed as porting/bundling it with LMMS and is not mentioned at all in the source. Can you help explain?

[jasp00]

I think Josh Green and Hexasoft should be mentioned; I will do that later.
Someone has chosen the GPL-3+ for the LMMS version. I believe it was Hexasoft who made version 0.31 of the plugin and changed the license. To change back to GPL-2+, permission is needed from all contributors after the change to GPL-3+. Looking at the log, I assume we have permission from @tobydox and Raine M. Ekman, and that there are no more contributors.

[tresf]

Edit: My post was TL;DR. I've emailed Hexasoft I hope his email address is still valid. I don't think we'll have any pushback from @tobydox or @softrabbit (Raine) -- they should chime in shortly -- and albeit obvious I'm in a couple commits too (fine by me. 👍 )

[tobydox]

I'm fine with whatever license change regarding the LADSPA plugins :-)

[softrabbit]

Do what is necessary, and don't ask for my permission. I don't consider myself a copyright holder here, I just reorganized the existing code a little.

[jasp00]

The pull request is merged.

[tresf]

@jasp00 great. Can you please leverage the upstream build script to export new source files so that we get it downstream?

[tresf]

FYI, No email response from Hexasoft yet. I tried the email from his C.V. page and it bounced back.

[tresf]

@jasp00, Hexasoft replied via email. GPL2 is fine.

Hey, it's @tresf from LMMS.
We're officially incorporating the Vocoder source code into upstream SWH/ladspa plugins.
Your latest changes state GPL 3, but SWH uses GPL 2.
Do we have your permission to use your code as GPL 2?

Hello,
yes you can use this code in the licence that best fits your need (until it is a "free" licence)!

Regards,
Hexasoft / Yannick Perret

[jasp00]

The vocoder is upstream and Hexasoft has clarified the license. This issue can be closed.

[tresf]

The vocoder is upstream and Hexasoft has clarified the license. This issue can be closed.

Agreed, but has anyone tested it?

[jasp00]

Besides me, I guess not. The new plug-in is at #2753. There is a tutorial.

[tresf]

Agreed, but has anyone tested it?

Besides me, I guess not. The new plug-in is at #2753. There is a tutorial.

Tested, wrote upgrade and merged. Much thanks. 👍

[trebmuh]

Hi @jasp00 and all,
great work here !
Could you please have a look to this : swh/ladspa#30 ?
Thanks.

[tresf]

Good catch. We don't have direct access to Steve's HTML source, but I've added a basic description here: swh/ladspa#30 (comment)

[trebmuh]

Thanks @tresf . We'll be waiting for Steve to regenerate the xml. At least, this "issue" will not get unnoticed.
Cheers for that.