- Name of the software: Vital
- Project/product Homepage: https://vital.audio/
- Why we should include this into the repository, i.e. what does it do that the alternatives do not? Vital is a cutting edge new instrument with a completely modern UI, available for commercial use, and open source. See this video for more details. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KYsDc62lnE&t=0s
- Is it open source? Yes. Please note the line towards the bottom of the README about naming binary releases.
- If it is open source, please provide a link to the most up to date, versioned source tarball/zipfile. master.zip links will not be accepted. None yet. I have created an issue which can be tracked here: https://github.com/mtytel/vital/issues/13
- If there are no upstream releases but the inclusion policy is otherwise met, please provide a link to the source repository (i.e. GitHub): https://github.com/mtytel/vital
Description
Description
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
If I understand the README correctly, it seems as if we won't even be able to call it "Vital" in the repos...
Comment Actions
The GPL does allow for those additional terms: subsections c, d, and e of section 7. I believe it may be possible to use the Third Party installer section to extract the official binary package, but I'm not sure. Some synonym for the word "Vital" could also be utilized. If neither of those solutions work, it's no big deal since the official binary works fine, but tracking loose files on the system can be rather a pain.
Comment Actions
Rejected for inclusion. Per our Package Inclusion Policy, it must have a stable release unless the " software has significant traction (i.e. prerelease)". This has no releases at all, they aren't accepting any pull requests (so if anyone has any issues, wants to submit fixes, etc. then it can be assumed they would be rejected), installation and other support seems to basically solely on their forums, and their clause "Do not use the name "Vital", "Vital Audio", "Tytel" or "Matt Tytel" for marketing or to name any distribution of binaries built with this source. This source code does not give you rights to infringe on trademarks." is absolutely a no-go. Packaging it by its very nature will produce a binary package, with binaries, that are named that.
Comment Actions
what about packing the open source version "vitalium"?
github :
https://github.com/DISTRHO/DISTRHO-Ports/tree/master/ports/vitalium
video talking about it: goto timestamp 40:18
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8IKOWsENXM
its basically a fork of vital without any of the drawbacks you spoke of.