[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[HEADS-UP] Please test Re: Speech overlapping with espeak-ng


Could people really please test these brltty and espeakup packages?

In short: if I don't get feedback very soon, I'll have to revert them to
espeak for Stretch, which would be very sad.

If there is something preventing from doing the tests, please tell, I
can't guess it.

Since the migration to espeak-ng poses strong problems, we *have* to
fix them before the release. If people don't actually test the fixes,
there's no way we can be sure that things are alright. I did test these
packages, but since I'm no speech user, I can't have a good idea of what
*sounds* right.

We have to decide very soon what to do for the next Debian release,
Stretch. The full freeze is 5th February, we can't introduce big
changes after that date, plus the 10-day migration period, it basically
means we have to decide by 25th January. If I don't get reports saying
that brltty 5.4-5 and espeakup 0.80-4 are now good, I'll revert to
espeak by 25th January.

To make testing yet easier, I have uploaded the packages to be tested
(brltty 5.4-5 and espeakup 0.80-4) into experimental. They are now
already available with:

deb http://incoming.debian.org/debian-buildd buildd-experimental main

Please test!


Samuel Thibault, on Sun 15 Jan 2017 15:57:48 +0100, wrote:
> I have uploaded to
> http://people.debian.org/~sthibault/tmp/
> a version of espeakup which introduces a 150ms delay after the cancel.
> This should be small enough to keep reactivity, but long enough to
> clearly separate speech. You can tune this value with the additional -c
> parameter.

Samuel Thibault, on Sun 15 Jan 2017 16:19:55 +0100, wrote:
> I have uploaded brltty packages on 
> http://people.debian.org/~sthibault/tmp/
> too. The delay can be changed with the cancel_pause espeak parameter,
> e.g.:
> /sbin/brltty -S cancel_pause=150 blabla...
> or
> speech-parameters es:cancel_pause=150
> Could people give a try to these packages, and see which value of the
> cancel pause they prefer?


Reply to: