Midi over wifi?

[Fozziemusic]

Forgive my ignorance, but is it possible to send/forward midi signals that my iphone receives to Tonex when connected through the TonexConfig wifi?

This would be super helpful, e.g. connecting a Korg nanocontrol to my phone/ipad and sending midi from it over wifi to S32-S3 and Tonex. I'm not sure how the web configurator communication works, but could it include this functionality?

[Builty]

This isn't supported at the moment. I haven't looked at what's possible with Midi over WiFi.
The web interface uses "web sockets", which is not designed or suitable for low latency. It would need to be something else.

[mchbrk]

I am investigating a little MIDI over Wi-Fi and MIDI over ESP-Now to have possibility to sync 2 Tonex Ones eventually with one MIDI input 🫣😇 But lacks free time for last couple of weeks... Also Waveshare 5B board HiRes+Touch is waiting to be investigated 😎

[Builty]

With the 5B hi-res, I've been adding quite a few new platforms in the next release (3 so far). It's becoming quite a lot of work to develop, document, test and support each one. If there is a decent amount of people requesting a platform I will still do it, but I think I need to avoid adding platforms if only 1 person wants it. Otherwise it takes up too much time that could be spent on other features that benefit more people.

[marcuslupinus]

I have been following this project for a while (and created a device for my needs) and I really think that you (Greg) are accepting a whole lot of new features (and platforms) and I think that it might put the whole project at risk at some point. Each platform increases the difficulty of testing. Each new feature increases the risk of breaking something already working. If, at some point in time Greg decides to stop maintaining the code, it makes it very difficult for somebody else to take it over, etc.

How would it be possible to evaluate how many users are actually using each platform and how many users are actually using each functionality ? Maybe new feature requests could be put into a kind of 'voting' platform to help justify them.

[Builty]

I read your reply but wasn't sure what to say. I've been thinking more about it.
I am at the point where I think there are plenty enough platforms. I think the new ones are valuable additions, but I'm now covering a big range of sizes and prices.

I've done a fair amount of work recently on making the platform side easier to work with and maintain. Each platform now has its own separate platform C file, and is separated from the GUI itself. And also worked on reducing the number of platform defines used in code, and moving them to things like HAS_FULL_UI instead of "if 4.3B or 3.5B or ..."

Once I finish the new V2.0.0.2, a voting system does sound like a good idea to guide the next round of changes. I do have the TaskList file here on Github also with a list of features that have been requested.