dragonfly-reverb
dragonfly-reverb copied to clipboard
michaelwillis
Debian package
@trebmuh I noticed at https://liberapay.com/trebmuh that you maintain a Debian package. What is required to get a package into the main Debian repo? It would be nice to distribute this reverb to a wider audience.
@michaelwillis sorry for the lag, I didn't noticed this message before and just stumbled across it while looking for documentation about dragonfly-reverb.
I'm not too sure about the process to get it included in Debian since I'm still learning the ropes there. I'll ask to the debian-multimedia-team and report back to you. I'm quite sure DF-R is already fulfilling the "needs to be maintained upstream" step! And I think you can certainly help speeding up the process with clarifying the license used since it's written "GPL-3" on the README.md page, but the LICENSE file is a GPL-2 one.
I've just sent a message to the debian multimedia packaging team. I'll update you when I've more info.
@trebmuh I just corrected the license to GPL3: https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb/commit/819696245495c9e6696d13c3fd16cf36342f68ef
Nice, thanks.
I've been replied to and it looks like the path to get DF-reverb included into the next Debian (Buster) is fine for me to do if you want/ask me to do so (I'm not sure if your initial question here was about you getting it into Debian or if you were asking me to do it, please comment).
If that's about me doing it, I just need to install a Buster system and make some modifications to my actual (Stretch) package, then to submit the package for pair-reviewing to the multimedia-team. Not a big deal, and I needed anyway to install a Buster environment to dev on it for other stuff which should happen sometime on the 10/15 following days, making it a good timing for DF-reverb anyway.
Could you submit the package to the peer review team? I am not equipped to easily install Debian Buster right now. I will try to make the official 1.0.0 release very soon, I hope that I can fix a minor bug in the next few days.
Yes, I can do that. Will do in approximatively 10/15 days. Feel free to ping me here if I didn't update this thread by then.
@michaelwillis another thing which is needed for an official build is to provide a source tarball including the submodule (DPF) for the release.
Ok, I will include DPF in the tarball. I didn't realize that the tar.gz source download didn't include the git submodule.
@michaelwillis the source tarball (tar.gz & zip) of the 1.0.0 version is still missing the DPF submodule.
@trebmuh Hmm, github automatically generates the source archive, and it doesn't include the submodule. I'm not sure how to get it to do so, other than creating my own archive and uploading it as a release artifact.
creating my own archive and uploading it as a release artifact.
I'm 99% sure that's the way other projects do.
Ok, I uploaded a tar file with the source that includes the dpf submodule. I'm not sure if the Debian package maintainers expect a specific directory structure to be in the tar, so let me know if I need to adjust it.
https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb/releases/download/1.0.0/DragonflyReverb-source-v1.0.0.tar.gz
Also, Github insists on the release page having the Source code download that does not include the submodule. I'm not sure if there is a way to remove it, but it would be nice if there were just some way to make that automatically include the dpf project. Oh well, that's not your problem to solve.
Ok, I uploaded a tar file with the source that includes the dpf submodule.
Nice, all good now.
I'm not sure if the Debian package maintainers expect a specific directory structure to be in the tar, so let me know if I need to adjust it.
It looks fine as it is now. I'll tell you if something is needed.
For github, I've got no idea, sorry. If something comes up to me, I'll let you know.
I'm right now setting up a Debian Buster dev system to package and submit DragonFly for inclusion in the official Debian repo.
@michaelwillis : I'm seeing that you didn't provide a full tarball file (including DPF) on the 2 last 1.1.x releases. Is it done on purpose?
@trebmuh These are pre-releases, I'm working on bug fixes. Once it stabilizes again, I will promote it to v1.2.0 as a stable release, and will include the source tar file.
@trebmuh Nevermind... I just got feedback from my best tester, he wasn't able to reproduce any known bugs on v1.1.2, so I'm calling it an official release. I included the source code tgz: https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb/releases/download/1.1.2/DragonflyReverb-Source-v1.1.2.tgz
Hi @michaelwillis , just to let you know that I've been repackaging it for the future debian stable (aka "buster") and I've just uploaded it to mentors.debian.net for peers-review while I'm looking for a sponsor for it.
In other words, that's in the pipe.
Hi @michaelwillis , I'd need a contact email for you. Can you provide one please?
I'm on IRC #lad if you'd prefer not to write it here.
Oh, and I'd need a bit of an overall description as well (a bit more than "A free hall-style reverb based on freeverb3 algorithms", my guess it that 4 or 5 lines of 80 characters would be fine).
How is this?
Dragonfly Reverb is a hall-style stereo-to-stereo reverb that uses Moorer's early reflection model and the allpass FDN Zita reverb algorithm. It is closely based on Hibiki Reverb from Freeverb3VST. It is available as LV2 and VST plugin formats, as well as a stand-alone JACK application.
@rghvdberg Is it ok if we list you as an upstream contact on the Debian package?
@rghvdberg said he was fine with that on IRC.
@michaelwillis : I've used your nice definition as a base for the description on the Debian package. Thank you for this.
I've then uploaded a new package (including packaging improvements in regards with feedback from my previous try) for debian-multimedia maintainers peer-reviews.
That's still, and progressing, in the pipe.
@michaelwillis as a general recommendation: Please keep the naming scheme and file type for source packages consistent! :)
@michaelwillis there is one question coming from the peer-review: why does dragonfly uses an embedded libsamplerate instead of the system one?
My guestimate is that it's easier for cross-plateform building. If I'm right here, then could you please provide a configure detection or a configure option for using the system provided one?
@trebmuh Sorry, no update. This is a busy time of year, but I will try to get to this.