Re: [linux-audio-user] Sharing samples via P2P

From: <>
Date: Sat Mar 25 2006 - 03:12:52 EET

On Fri, 24 Mar, 2006 at 05:53PM -0500, Dana Olson spake thus:
> On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 22:34 +0000, wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Mar, 2006 at 09:50PM +0000, carmen spake thus:
> > > On Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 04:09:00PM -0500, lee@email-addr-hidden wrote:
> > > > bittorrent has command line clients. The bittorrent package in debian comes with two.
> > >
> > > BT is mainly designed for a few large files with brief initial bursts of popularity to sustain the distribution model..a few gigs of SXSW trailers, pirated movies, DVD ISO's or what not
> > >
> > > for a bunch of more obscure files (drum hits created with Smack, ZynnAddSub patches, asound.conf's), something like eMule works much better. i think we probably want something like that, only more minimal, and without all the warez. i think there should be a requirement for the network, Public Domain, CC, GPL/BSD/MIT licensed content only, or at least make it glaringly obvious if it isnt.
> > >
> > > has anyone investigated coral? it looks like some kind of public free distributed akamai..
> > >
> > > W.A.S.T.E. is an egregious waste of bandwidth, and i dont see it in portage anyway. what about freenet, anyone used that?
> > >
> > > i think a web interface would be best for categorization, commenting, forking, user-submitted revisions etc..then point to the actual content on freenet or coral (unless that rumour about paul's 1.8 TB of disk space and bandwidth just sitting idle is true..)
> >
> > The Circle ( looks good.
> >
> > One file to download and go. Also has instant messaging and IRC style
> > comms.
> >
> > We could have our own little network pretty quickly, methinks.
> >
> > Done properly, we could get a lot from something like this.
> >
> > James
> There's another option, part of the GNU project:
> I don't know about other distros, but it is in debian for sure, adding
> to convenience.
> I've never heard of Coral or The Circle before. And Freenet.. I looked
> at it before, and it seems kinda complex just to share some
> music-related files.
> I think that whatever we choose, it should be easy for most users to get
> it installed. There are a lot of people who just want to use their PC
> and the applications there, and don't want to have to download seven
> libraries and compile everything from souce. Maybe no one on this list
> minds, but we would really limit the possibilites to restrict it to just
> us. Just my 2 cents..
> If I had the bandwidth and disk space (or money to fund it), I'd prefer
> a website for all this stuff, including hosting of the files. It'd be a
> lot more convenient - if James is offline, and he is the only one who is
> still sharing MetallicDrumBeats.tar.bz2 which I wanna get, then I'm out
> of luck. If it's on a website, then yay, I can download it.
> Hmm, what about a page at SourceForge? I don't know if they have limits
> on something like this, but I remember seeing something on SF that was
> not an application, but a website for free stuff. I can't remember
> exactly what it was, but it might be possible that they would host it
> happily?

Argh! I hate getting stuff off source forge simply because of how
many clicks it takes.

Personally, I was thinking more in terms of samples than complete
pieces and had this idea that we would have a common library, accessed
through p2p. Maybe a bit fanciful.
> Dana

"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb.  Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)
Received on Sat Mar 25 04:15:18 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 25 2006 - 04:15:19 EET