Replace LADSPA effects with equivalent Lv2 versions?

LMMS / lmms

Cross-platform music production software

https://lmms.io

GNU General Public License v2.0

8.16k stars 1.01k forks source link

Replace LADSPA effects with equivalent Lv2 versions? #5652

Open JohannesLorenz opened 4 years ago

JohannesLorenz commented 4 years ago

Enhancement Summary

The summary says it all. Use the system-installed lv2 libs instead of providing LADSPA in our submodules.

Justification

This will:

reduce our code base, increasing compile time and energy consumption
stop us from updating our forks
decrease the number of issues against LMMS

I'm not sure if this will work, though. A few points:

Lv2 currently does not work on mac (#5536, will be fixed soon)
At least for Arch (Linux with large user base), only calf seems to be in the "community repo", so the others are not officially supported and more difficult to install.
When an Lv2 plugin will change in behavior, we can't control this easily with savefile patching (since the lv2 lib is external)

Opinions?

Spekular commented 4 years ago

This sounds like a good idea to me, but downside 3 is my biggest concern. Can you elaborate on how exactly this makes things harder?

Since we should still have access to all the saved effect parameters(?), I assume the issue is that we no longer control which version of the plugin is installed. Is it fair to say "upgrade the plugin bundles at your own risk"? Technically it's not our bug if a user upgrades a plugin and the output is different, right?

JohannesLorenz commented 4 years ago

Can you elaborate on how exactly this makes things harder?

I think you already mentioned my concern :+1: And I also think your "upgrade the plugin bundles at your own risk" statement makes sense. An issue is though that if you just tell your system "update all packages", this can update e.g. the calf lv2 packages without that you really wanted that.

The overhead to track the version of the lv2 plugins (if that's even possible) and then change our ports when they change their code sounds too large to me.

More opinions?

qnebra commented 4 years ago

Why not going into fully native? I know, there wasn't every plugin yet, but current (master + PR's) were decent ones, and cover majority of what is needed by casual user.

firewall1110 commented 4 years ago

I think this is not good idea. We can think about porting LADSPA to LMMS format with better GUI but with compatibility:

when opened project with LADSPA , then used new LMMS effect with the same settings (which is doing the same).

P.S.

LADSPA is fine for effects except GUI - it is complicated for understanding (especially for beginners).

musikBear commented 4 years ago

There still need to be support for old LADSPA, and there still need to be a LADSPA library similar to 1.2.2 available, either as separate download (preferred) or included (bloating downloads/ Server usage) Upside not mentioned is that one of the strangest components in lmms can be shelved! I am ofcause talking about the "Ladspa-plugin-browser".