electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
 Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » Nord Modular G2 Discussion
Reverse engineering USB protocol, NM1 to G2 converter
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Nord Modular Editors
Page 3 of 5 [120 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Author Message
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24079
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
Is this something illegal?


It could be argued that it's an alteration on a copyrighted work.

On the other hand the conversion as such is an alteration in itself already, and I think that a proper note in the patch indicating such actually is a good thing. This way it is clear what has happened to the patch.

_________________
Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Blue Hell wrote:
qfingers wrote:
Is this something illegal?


It could be argued that it's an alteration on a copyrighted work.

On the other hand the conversion as such is an alteration in itself already, and I think that a proper note in the patch indicating such actually is a good thing. This way it is clear what has happened to the patch.


Are you saying that it's illegal to convert the patches? I'm not even sure they are copyrightable? Were the necessary steps taken for copyright? Is it something I need to check? This project may stop dead in it's tracks if that's the case. I would be in trouble for enabling violation of copyright. This is starting to sound troublesome...

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24079
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
Were the necessary steps taken for copyright?


Strictly speaking ... yes I think so. They form creative work, and that in itself makes it subject to copyright laws in many countries.

In the past I have been making conversion software for NM patches as well, no one has ever reported to me having a problem with that. And indeed the spirit in the NM community, as we then called it, was more like sharing than like restricting.

There however have been issues in the past regarding the copyright issue. There have been people trying to sell other's patches as their own, which was anoteher matter of course.

In my opinion it would be in the spirit of the NM community who created the patches that they would be made available for the G2, but I can not really speak for others, of course.

I think however that there is a way out, in that you could make your conversion software available and that people make up their own mind about whether they want to use it or not.

Anyway, personally I welcome your initiave.

_________________
Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Well, I'll release the software with my copyright notices and place the text blocks that say the patch was converted by my software. That way I don't really have to be concerned because someone else will be doing the convertion or at least posting it. Hey, I'd probably post of group of converted files but say who they were initially created by and not call the converted patch "mine " or created by me. Also, I may write converters for completely different synthesizers: nord lead, waldorf, moog, roland, korg, etc. This would be kind of a weird issue because it would be an interpretation of the original work. I think I can call those my own as long as I site the original author or where I got it from.

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cappy2112



Joined: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 2465
Location: San Jose, California
Audio files: 2
G2 patch files: 1

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
as long as I site the original author or where I got it from.
q


If you're working from the NM1 archive which contains the patches sorted by author (each directory name is the author of the patches in that directory), it would be fair to the original author to write the directoryname/authorname as a comment field in the G2 patch, as part of the conversion process.

This gives some traceability back to the original patch, which is useful for other reasons.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24079
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
This would be kind of a weird issue because it would be an interpretation of the original work.


That is another interesting aspect of it Very Happy

_________________
Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jksuperstar



Joined: Aug 20, 2004
Posts: 2503
Location: Denver
Audio files: 1
G2 patch files: 18

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

The text field seems to be a perfect place for this information.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
3phase



Joined: Jul 27, 2004
Posts: 1183
Location: Berlin
Audio files: 13
G2 patch files: 141

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

because a patch is always the design of somebody while a conversion by a software is an automated process it would be a bit harsh to eliminate the name of the original author and replace it by the author of the conversion software... Its pretty much the same if you would convert the song of a band to a mp3 and put your name on it..
This way all mp3´s in the net should be named Frauenhofer xyz...

Different to music copyrights there are no laws protecting a patch..at least not yet..But from an ethical point its not wright.

The only fair thing and as mentioned before aswell useful thing is that the patch would keep its original name but by insertion of a few text modules
the original author gets a reference aswell as the version and name of the converter..and of cause credits for the author of the conversion..

I think this would be the most political correct way and good reference in case there might be improved converters around at a later point.

Its an old and good tradition in the shareware world to leave the authors credits with the software.

In a converted patch booth the original authors and the converters name should be credited.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

My question is why you think I'm going to remove the original authors name? My purpose is to label as being a conversion of a patch based on a program I wrote. I feel I should get credit for the conversion. Yes it is automated, but requires a huge amount of effort to get it right. I'd say it's proabably a factor of 10 to 100 in the amount of time and effort to create the converter to the amount of time it took to create the patch.
So my credit will be there if you have a problem with that, please send a list of patches that are your work and I will not include them in the archive of converted patches. If anyone else has a problem with it, please either list it here or send me a private message. The initial version of the software probably won't be ready for a while so there is ample amount of time so I can gather the list. I will make note of the fact in the readme file the list of patches that authors didn't want converted (with my name and converter application name added to the patch). Then individuals who download the converter can run the application with the original patch if they choose. That I do not have any control over.

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Afro88



Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Posts: 701
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Audio files: 12
G2 patch files: 79

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

That's right qfingers, you should be able to add a note that credits you and your program for the conversion. But the way you put it in that initial post was a bit misleading...

Quote:
Not to mention having my name slapped on every converted patch.


As I understand it, you're just programming the converter, you're not going to convert all the patches yourself and upload them somewhere. So I think it's unfair to ask you to somehow program the converter to add the author's name from the folder in the archive it came from in each converted patch - that's quite a task. However, most patch authors put their name either in the text block, as the name of a module in the patch itself or in the filename. If you could somehow retain this information in the conversion process that would be great. That way, anyone who converts any patch will retain the information the author wanted kept with the patch in the first place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I think what we are dealing with here is more like "translation" then like "conversion". If we look at it that way we can look at it like books; clearly the author is the original creator but a translator can eiter make him shine or ruin all the fun.

I think that's a decent analogy, I'd like to add that jokes are notoriously hard to translate which I predict will hold true here as well.

Final note; just because something is automated doesn't mean it's not a (indirect) expresion of creativity.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
cappy2112



Joined: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 2465
Location: San Jose, California
Audio files: 2
G2 patch files: 1

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

[quote="Afro88"]That's right qfingers, you should be able to add a note that credits you and your program for the conversion. But the way you put it in that initial post was a bit misleading...

Quote:
Not to mention having my name slapped on every converted patch.


Quote:
it's unfair to ask you to somehow program the converter to add the author's name from the folder in the archive it came from in each converted patch - that's quite a task.


No it's not a lot of work at all. It can be done with 5-8 lines of code.
I wasn't asking him specifically to convert & credit each patch by hand, just suggesting a mechanism to credit the original author. It would be done automatically as the patch is converted.

Quote:
However, most patch authors put their name either in the text block, as the name of a module in the patch itself or in the filename.


In the NM1 patch archive, the one sorted by Author's Name, the most of the patch filenames names do not have references to the author.
Regardless, pulling the string with the Author's name from the filename, directory name, or inside the notes field in the patch, is easily done.

Most likely the patches that are succesfully converted will be posted in the G2 archives by one or more people. Referencing the original author as well as the author of the conversion tool, and any format/style/presentation is cake.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fozzie



Joined: Jun 04, 2004
Posts: 875
Location: Near Wageningen, the Netherlands
Audio files: 8
G2 patch files: 49

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Let me drop in my few eurocents. I have no great interest in converted NM1 patches, although I find the idea, project and time invested by qfingers highly commendable. cheers
As long as there is no selling or commercial use of NMarchive patches, for me there is little difference between publishing the convertor or batches of converted files. I understand there might be some legal issues about who performs the actual conversion, but since the files have no clear (protected) legal status I don't think that is very important (especially in the 'spirit' of the NM community).
I think it is good that qfingers is planning to include some conversion-credits-text into the patches, that way it is clear what has happened to the patch.
About original author credits: if the author didn't bother to include his name in the patch and just sent it around on the mailing list, I don't see a moral obligation for qfingers to get the author's names from directory names. It would be nice, but if it is not done, so be it. IIRC there is also a sorted patch collection without author-name folders, so this name-referencing is not coupled in an absolute way to the patches; I believe it was more the wonderful dedication of some people to 'harvest' all patches from the mailinglist and archive it with author names (not specifically asked for by the authors).

Anyway, I have only contributed a few patches to the old mailinglist and they weren't of the highest quality, so decide for yourself what weight my opinion should have in this discussion.

_________________
Spinning at ~0.0000115740740741 Hz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chresan



Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 150
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-14716.html&postorder=asc

Hi qfingers,

Bluehell pointed me to this thread earlier, but I did not find the time to read it until now.

I want to recommend that you build your work upon the Nomad / Nmedit project.
In the history of the Nmedit project several failures were done when people were too much
focused on their own preferences. For example we now have unfinished implementations of the
Nm1 editor in four programming languages. Even if they were not discontinued it just makes
no sense to have four implementations. Now, if you decide to make your implementation in
python you have to keep in mind that others have to develop the G2 editor in python
or port your code to another language. Either way much time will be lost and duplicate work
will be done. Then again it might require four years until a partially usable editor
is available and interest fades away because people already started working on the G3 protocols,... Smile

So, my point is if you base your work upon the Nomad sources and the different APIs we (will) provide
then much time can be saved. For your project you can use our Nm1 patch parser and a API+file format to access NM1/G2
module descriptions. And for others who want to implement the patch editor we have a theme engine and a visual
editor for building the module user interfaces.

Finally about using midi in the g2 editor / wine try if this works for you:
http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-users/2005-July/018392.html

With the Nm1 editor it allowed me to upload the patches but the application
always crashes because of a dead lock.

Sincerely,

Christian

_________________
----------------------
http://nmedit.sf.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

My plan was to release the entire NM1 patch collection with the patches converted, names of modules, textpad, etc. maintained as much as possible with my little NameBar with my name on it. I figure if no name is on it, I'm not going to come up with one. But the collection would look exactly as it is, so people who had or have an NM1 can find their favorite patches located in the same place. So basically the only external difference between converted collection and the original is that each file will be renamed with .pch2 instead of .pch.

Most of my testing will be against the NM1 patch collection to see how many patches I convert. Plus it helps in the debug process with such a large base to test against. I think the NM1->G2 patch collection should be version stamped as to the version of converter that was used. There may have to be tweaks done to the patches. I will probably have some sort of converter configuration file so these tweaks can be stored and used through each version of configurer. For example, if patch A requires a different module layout to model the Sine Bank module, that information will be stored in a config file so it can be reused if I update the converter and rerun against the NM1 patch collection. One model of module may work better for one patch then another. This needs to be maintained as well. I'm sure the first several versions of converter will require tuning to get the patches correct.

But, first things first. I'm right now working main converter which will call a function for every NM1 module with all connections to it. The function will instantiate a module (or several modules) in the G2 patch, set all the parameters (names, values, modes, etc...), and then setup the proper connections to the instantiated modules. When that is complete, write the file. One quick optimization done will be to select the proper G2 module if some functionality is done used in a module (for example, oscillator sync, selecting OscA, OscD instead of OscB or OscC). Things like that are simple enough. I will probably have alot of trouble with the Master/Slave (gray cables). I will only check to see that they are connected to one another which they then can be removed. If there are any modules in between the Master and Slave, they will not get converted properly. In that case, I will explain the problem in a NameBar or the TextPad.

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

chresan wrote:
http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-14716.html&postorder=asc
I want to recommend that you build your work upon the Nomad / Nmedit project.
In the history of the Nmedit project several failures were done when people were too much
focused on their own preferences. For example we now have unfinished implementations of the
Nm1 editor in four programming languages. Even if they were not discontinued it just makes
no sense to have four implementations. Now, if you decide to make your implementation in
python you have to keep in mind that others have to develop the G2 editor in python
or port your code to another language. Either way much time will be lost and duplicate work
will be done. Then again it might require four years until a partially usable editor
is available and interest fades away because people already started working on the G3 protocols,... Smile

So, my point is if you base your work upon the Nomad sources and the different APIs we (will) provide
then much time can be saved. For your project you can use our Nm1 patch parser and a API+file format to access NM1/G2
module descriptions. And for others who want to implement the patch editor we have a theme engine and a visual
editor for building the module user interfaces.

Sincerely,

Christian


Sorry Christian for not responding sooner, I just saw your post. I thought about doing this within your project but I'm not a java programmer. My language of choice is python. I know it well, have been using it for years and I know the API, extension modules, and what's available for 3rd party support. To get up to speed with java would take me more time then I want to spend. I picked what I know and what works well for me. The application is going to be command line/configuration file driven, so there is nothing stopping anyone from calling the application and using it's output in a GUI or another project. I don't think I would have gotten as far as I have using some other language. That's why I coded it in python. I do it for my daily job so I'm well versed in it. I'm sure you made your design choices based on the same set of principles. So, I'm going to complete it under python. I'm sorry it's probably not the answer you wanted but I cannot justify the time to learn java and all it's API's for this project. But, I still think you will be able to use the result in some fashion.

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chresan



Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 150
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
... Sorry Christian for not responding sooner, I just saw your post.

Hehe, that was fast enough - I posted it only a few minutes ago Very Happy

However, I understand your language decision better now but there still might be parts where both projects can benefit from each other.
A good way would be to store as much data as possible in interchangeable files which can be used by both projects. The nmedit project already has the nm1 module descriptions available in xml and the G2 module descriptions will follow. The conversion of modules could be defined in a xml file, too.
We also provide the protocol definition language which allows to define protocols in a text format and an implementation in c++. If you would use this language then the G2 protocol can be shared too ( I don't know if it is adequate for communication via usb). (See libpdl http://nmedit.sourceforge.net/subprojects/libpdl.html )


Christian

_________________
----------------------
http://nmedit.sf.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24079
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
I will probably have alot of trouble with the Master/Slave (gray cables).


Yes I think so. In principle though these signals are linear FM with a sensitivity different from the usual red FM inputs, I don't remember the exact details, was it twice as sensitive or half ... scratch

But also the FM for the G2 was changed I seem to recall ... I think Rob might know the details.

Maybe this would give a possibillity to work with the gray signals.

_________________
Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
I will probably have alot of trouble with the Master/Slave (gray cables). I will only check to see that they are connected to one another which they then can be removed. If there are any modules in between the Master and Slave, they will not get converted properly. In that case, I will explain the problem in a NameBar or the TextPad.


First of all; you are doing great work and I think there is no shame at all in being unable to convert some patches.

About those grey cables; if you and he have a moment you should talk with Rob. One of the forms of fm in the G2 was inspirered by the grey cables of the NM because Rob feared some things that were possible in the NM would no longer be possible in the G2. Some "grey cable" patches may be salvagable by replacing the grey cable (and anything inbetween) with some fm. I wouldn't blame you if you put that on some list to be looked at in 2008 though.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Blue Hell wrote:

But also the FM for the G2 was changed I seem to recall ... I think Rob might know the details.


Yeah, there are a few fm algorithems in the G2, there is at least one that was made specifically to make up for the lack of grey cables. I seem to remember it was on a OSC that could dowen to 0Hz

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24079
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

You could be right Kassen, we need Ro here Very Happy
_________________
Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

chresan wrote:
qfingers wrote:
... Sorry Christian for not responding sooner, I just saw your post.

Hehe, that was fast enough - I posted it only a few minutes ago Very Happy

However, I understand your language decision better now but there still might be parts where both projects can benefit from each other.
A good way would be to store as much data as possible in interchangeable files which can be used by both projects. The nmedit project already has the nm1 module descriptions available in xml and the G2 module descriptions will follow. The conversion of modules could be defined in a xml file, too.
We also provide the protocol definition language which allows to define protocols in a text format and an implementation in c++. If you would use this language then the G2 protocol can be shared too ( I don't know if it is adequate for communication via usb). (See libpdl http://nmedit.sourceforge.net/subprojects/libpdl.html )


Christian


I considered a an intermediate file for doing the job but rejected it as I would have to write and maintain a parser and write for that as well. I decided just to use .pch2 file format because it is finished and working (bugs nowithstanding). So there will be no intermediate file format.

I am not a big fan of XML either. My philosophy is if the format cannot be parsed by a one-line (or less then 10) "awk" script, it's too complicated. Also, I don't like any the API's for XML in any language (python, java, perl, C/C++, etc). I only use XML when forced at gun point. Otherwise, I try to stay away. The configuration file will probably similar to a .ini file or a close relative. Simple, easy, parsable by just about every language.

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Kassen wrote:
qfingers wrote:
I will probably have alot of trouble with the Master/Slave (gray cables). I will only check to see that they are connected to one another which they then can be removed. If there are any modules in between the Master and Slave, they will not get converted properly. In that case, I will explain the problem in a NameBar or the TextPad.


First of all; you are doing great work and I think there is no shame at all in being unable to convert some patches.

About those grey cables; if you and he have a moment you should talk with Rob. One of the forms of fm in the G2 was inspirered by the grey cables of the NM because Rob feared some things that were possible in the NM would no longer be possible in the G2. Some "grey cable" patches may be salvagable by replacing the grey cable (and anything inbetween) with some fm. I wouldn't blame you if you put that on some list to be looked at in 2008 though.


I'm not quite there yet. My initial converter is going to be plain and dumb. If there is something it cannot do (which there will be alot), it'll will just give up or create what it can and flag what it cannot fix.

By the way I'm starting with the tips-and-trick page for the original modular as there are alot of patches but they are simple. This is a good testbed for the converter. Once I get those to a reasonable state, I'm going to run it against all the patches in the NM1 patch collection.

As far as the Gray cable issue, I think the zero Hz thing will work, I just need to code for it. The question becomes where the Master comes from, because that is where the main problem is going to occur. It may be a by hand thing for now.

By the way, I think were going to need Rob on alot of stuff.

q
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
3phase



Joined: Jul 27, 2004
Posts: 1183
Location: Berlin
Audio files: 13
G2 patch files: 141

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

qfingers wrote:
My question is why you think I'm going to remove the original authors name?
q


because it sounded like that when you use the term slap over.

But even when you dont intend to do so, the names of the original authors would be removed in many cases when you remove patches out of theire creators folders...
All this patches that dont have named modules inside loose the connection to the initial author... You might say that the author havent cared anyway by not marking the patch. But i can tell you that when you send a patch you are just working on to a mailing list you often dont realise that the patch isnt propperly signed internal because its part of your signed mail.
Therefore the patches that got removed from the source mails are sorted in individual authors folders to preserve that belonging to a specific author even when being removed from the list.

When you have a go of converting the whole lib, what i apreciate, you should convert the relation to the authors folders aswell...
either by keeping the folders. Or by inserting nametags reffering to the sourcefolder in the NM mailing list libary.

You can credit yourself for the conversion as much and as dominant as you want but the source have to be be visible aswell.

I dont agree that writing the converter is 100 times writing the libary.
Its more that writing 100 patches...for sure...maybe even as much as writing 1000 patches..but never as much as 20000 patches.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
qfingers



Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Tucson, AZ
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

3phase wrote:
qfingers wrote:
My question is why you think I'm going to remove the original authors name?
q


because it sounded like that when you use the term slap over.



To quote myself from the actual post:

qfingers wrote:

Not to mention having my name slapped on every converted patch.


Where was the term over? On means on, not to replace. If you are going to quote my "terms" make sure you, quote it exactly. I could see if I put "over" on my statement how you may be upset. But that was not what I said (as you can see).

As far as the patch collection, as I posted earlier, it will be exactly the same as it is currently, only the names will end in .pch2 instead of .pch.
If the patches have problems converting, I will also keep the .pch file so it can be looked at and possibly fixed. That's all. Cool???

q

Last edited by qfingers on Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Nord Modular Editors
Page 3 of 5 [120 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » Nord Modular G2 Discussion
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use