Hi
Where can I find the origin of this text, so I can fix it centrally? I didn’t find it on the Zynthian/x42 repos.
I think it’s here (doesn’t help so much to say its on line 1):
1 Like
Thanks @hannesmenzel!
Pull request sent:
Fix grammar in x42 Convolver reverb descriptions by jawn · Pull Request #220 · zynthian/zynthian-sys
Verified locally by copying the file to /zynthian/config.
As the file is a veryyyyyyyyyyyyy long line it explains why the regular search didn’t find it.
You can edit the engine DB from the webconf. You will see that edited entries are marked as edited.
You can make a PR to zynthian-sys with the edited file. The workflow should be something like this:
- Update your system
- Delete your engines DB file:
/zynthian/config/engine_config.json
- Restart the UI and webconf services, so your engine DB is fresh copied from zynthian-sys.
- From webconf, edit the engines you want. Please be careful to not enable/disable engines or modifying ratings or categories without discussing with core developers. Regarding texts, take into accounts how it’s displayed on the UI. Be clear and concise.
- Then copy the edited file to a local copy of your zynthian-sys repository, forked from the official one. Commit to your fork and make a PR.
Regards
2 Likes
Thanks for documenting the process, PR is already sent, see previous post.
Have you verified the only changes in the file are the fixes you want to commit? Did you start with a fresh one to be sure?
Hi, I changed it in VS Code based on the latest version.
I did a diff but not ideal as it’s one line. I can check on Monday when I am at my PC again, reformatting and diffing the old and new version to make sure.
And a really small thing, could we have the json files in pretty human readable format, when you’re doing the pr. thanks
1 Like
Agreed @chrismat , I added this in the pull request comments. If the powers that be agree then I will make it so.
Note to reviewer: it would help to autoformat/newline this json file, however I didn’t want to make this change myself.
Benefits would be: searchability and useful git diffs/history.
2 Likes
Hi @jawn !
I already merged your changes and also added the newlines to the JSON format, so managing changes to this file with git will be a lot easier.
Thanks for the suggestion! 
4 Likes
Thanks @jofemodo , that will reduce headaches in the future 
.
1 Like
Another cleanup opportunity, many engines show the description in lorum ipsum style.
Impact:
- Engine selection on Zynthian
- Webconf engines screen (where it can be edited)
Cause:
If no description is found, one of the following is used at random, AND the value is saved in the engine config file.
"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.", "Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.", "Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.", "Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum."
Suggestions:
- Leave empty descriptions empty in code. While this was very useful in dev it is not desirable in a released product.
- Once addressed in code, make existing Latin descriptions empty again in the config.
If this sounds like a plan, I can create a PR myself.
2 Likes
Hi @jawn !
I just removed the Lorem Ipsum texts from descriptions and also changed the code to not generate this anymore.
Regards,
3 Likes
I love the “low hanging fruit” category. In that regard I have some ideas for easy fixes for the chain control view:
The autogenerated “ctrls#1” to “ctrls#N” pages look awful. Sometimes I’m tempted just to write a ttl just to get rid ot that. Let’s just name it in a pleasing looking way. “Parameter Page 1” to “Parameter Page N” for example.
The bypass (which at least for me isn’t even working) is attached to the bottom of the parameters. Can’t we just put that in a menu under the engine headline (like, when you enter the “> engine” field)?
Speaking of the engine headline, currently it’s formatted like this:
> engine
ctrls#1
ctrls#2
ctrls#3
Can we do it the other way round?
Engine
˪ Parameter Page 1
˪ Parameter Page 2
˪ Parameter Page 3
2 Likes
“ctrls” is good, short, crisp.
“Parameter page” is long, repetitive, cluttering.
1 Like
Fine, call it “Page N”. ctrls#N for me looks like an error for me.
Alternatively, call it Controls 1, 2, 3. Would that be clear enough @hannesmenzel ?
This should be working for everyone. Please report a bug if it is broken. This is very much by design to allow MIDI binding, e.g. of footswitch to bypass to allow stomp type action. It is a much requested and long awaited feature that is finally hear for every processor. If you don’t need it then simply ignore it. There will be many of us who never use most of the parameters in these lists but we can’t bespoke design the list for everyone!
I too have never been a fan of this. It does look a bit ugly but was chosen to be representative in a small form factor device. It could be improved, e.g. params n or controls n or page n. All are sufficiently succint.
2 Likes
I prefer “Page N’“
It is the most succinct.
Especially if we ever get sonic feedback, it pronounces faster than two-syllable words.
As to the bypass: It is absolutely a big plus to have this as a regular, bindable, zctrl.
BUT: also seeing the bypassed state is reflected in the chain manager view (albeit with too low contrast, let’s also find a good background/foreground combo for that…), I was under the assumption this would be togglable from the processor options as well.
Speaking of which, I believe that the item “Control View” should be at the top of that list.
1 Like
Could this be done with some kind of x or diagonal over the box?