hi, On 11/17/18 5:10 PM, Jean Pierre Cimalando wrote: > Hi. I'm the author of a personal fork of JUCE, currently at 5.4.1, > which permits building VST2 without use of a non-free Steinberg > developer kit. > > Olivier Humbert (trebmuh) has pointed me to this bug, and I think I > should give my humble answer since I did a bit of work on this. > >> Until there is a proper solution for the problem, i suggest to keep >> JUCE from migrating to testing. > > The DISTRHO plugin framework aka DPF, permits to build VST2 based on > VeSTige, a reverse-engineered header, free of Steinberg's licensing > restrictions. thanks for the heads up. i had a look at vestige in order to find a replacement for the VST headers, but found that it is lacking quite a few opcodes to work with JUCE. i've started my own fork of vestige at https://git.iem.at/zmoelnig/VeSTige to fix those headers. > In a recent commit of my JUCE fork, I did the same by permitting to > integrate VeSTige into JUCE as a replacement of the usual framework. > https://github.com/jpcima/JUCE/commit/2414d676068ee96c5f53f18882889f8a1f77564c i see that you did more than just the trivial changes from #define to typedefs. i'd be happy to integrate your changes into my VeSTige header *and* into Debian's JUCE, IFF the headers are reverse-engineered in a "legally clean" way. IANAL, but assume that this is quite a tricky business, given that there are/were quite a number of freely (as in beer) available headers (including the ones from steinberg themselves) floating around the internet, making it trivial (althoug illegal) to just copy the content of the headers to your own liking. so the plan is to do a detailed documentation on how to obtain the various values in the process of reverse-engineering, on order to "proof" that no reference to the steinberg SDK (or any derivative thereof) was required. i don't know whether this would hold in court, but i hop there is a chance. anyhow: afaict, there is no sign that *your* headers were properly reverse-engineered, since you only give the result. but again: if you can convince me that they were, this might be a very possible way to go forward. gfdsar IOhannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature