5 ms·

Wait, open source but I have to make an account to get anything? Public git repo or GTFO.

danbolt 5y ago
I found the source code for the synth here on GitHub[1], but it doesn't look like they advertise it on their site? It seems to be compiling/linking fine on Pop!_OS, but I had to do some apt trial/error to ensure the right packages were installed. [1] https://github.com/mtytel/vital https://github.com/mtytel/vital
- joe_the_user 5y ago
  Let us know if you get enough for a usable system once you're done.
  - danbolt 5y ago
    Hey sorry, for the late followup. I was getting compile/link errors related to Google Services dependencies. I think this is one of those situations where it's GPL-licensed, but not necessarily the most accessible.
ghostly_s 5y ago
In fact they seem to require a paid subscription.
- vollmond 5y ago
  The synth is free. Paid levels seem to be mostly for skins/presets/support. There are more wavetables in the paid version, though I don't know enough about wavetable synthesis to know how much that matters.
  - joe_the_user 5y ago
    I'm at the free download and it's demanding I register. Which might still be "free" but isn't part of the terms of things considered "open source".
    - tomtheelder 5y ago
      It's OSS they just aren't that up front about it. They want you to make an account. I feel like that's okay. https://github.com/mtytel/vital https://github.com/mtytel/vital
      - saalaa 5y ago
        It doesn't look OSS to me. I haven't registered and downloaded the software from their website but I doubt it would come with any licensing or OSS mention. The marketing doesn't mention OSS either. There's at least one thread asking for clarification on the subject which, as far as I can tell, is not formaly answered. The repo you linked is 13 months old but it's informative nonetheless: > Do not distribute the presets that come with the free version of Vital. They're under a separate license that does not allow redistribution. So my best guess is that the author is granting himself an exemption and distributing that software as a closed source software. Which is legal, it certainly helps that there's only one author. If we really wanted to know what's going on exactly, we should download the software from their website. If it's advertised as being OSS and under the GPL, we should ask for a copy of the source code of the distributed software, as provided by the GPL.
        kragen 5y ago
        It's universally accepted that aggregating free software with non-free data does not make the software non-free. The explanation in the repo about the licensing is correct and perfectly okay from an OSS perspective. The software's copyright holder cannot infringe his own copyright by distributing the software from his own website, even if he also offers a GPL license. If he were accepting contributions from other people you might have a case, but he says he isn't.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

I found the source code for the synth here on GitHub[1], but it doesn't look like they advertise it on their site? It seems to be compiling/linking fine on Pop!_OS, but I had to do some apt trial/error to ensure the right packages were installed. [1] https://github.com/mtytel/vital https://github.com/mtytel/vital

joe_the_user 5y ago
Let us know if you get enough for a usable system once you're done.
- danbolt 5y ago
  Hey sorry, for the late followup. I was getting compile/link errors related to Google Services dependencies. I think this is one of those situations where it's GPL-licensed, but not necessarily the most accessible.

ghostly_s 5y ago

In fact they seem to require a paid subscription.

vollmond 5y ago
The synth is free. Paid levels seem to be mostly for skins/presets/support. There are more wavetables in the paid version, though I don't know enough about wavetable synthesis to know how much that matters.
- joe_the_user 5y ago
  I'm at the free download and it's demanding I register. Which might still be "free" but isn't part of the terms of things considered "open source".
  - tomtheelder 5y ago
    It's OSS they just aren't that up front about it. They want you to make an account. I feel like that's okay. https://github.com/mtytel/vital https://github.com/mtytel/vital
    - saalaa 5y ago
      It doesn't look OSS to me. I haven't registered and downloaded the software from their website but I doubt it would come with any licensing or OSS mention. The marketing doesn't mention OSS either. There's at least one thread asking for clarification on the subject which, as far as I can tell, is not formaly answered. The repo you linked is 13 months old but it's informative nonetheless: > Do not distribute the presets that come with the free version of Vital. They're under a separate license that does not allow redistribution. So my best guess is that the author is granting himself an exemption and distributing that software as a closed source software. Which is legal, it certainly helps that there's only one author. If we really wanted to know what's going on exactly, we should download the software from their website. If it's advertised as being OSS and under the GPL, we should ask for a copy of the source code of the distributed software, as provided by the GPL.
      - kragen 5y ago
        It's universally accepted that aggregating free software with non-free data does not make the software non-free. The explanation in the repo about the licensing is correct and perfectly okay from an OSS perspective. The software's copyright holder cannot infringe his own copyright by distributing the software from his own website, even if he also offers a GPL license. If he were accepting contributions from other people you might have a case, but he says he isn't.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]