-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 556
Add T5-TTS library #965
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add T5-TTS library #965
Changes from 1 commit
f3c2b86
1f441e5
1bb00b0
2d5ef28
376ef04
699417c
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -666,6 +666,13 @@ export const MODEL_LIBRARIES_UI_ELEMENTS = { | |
| filter: true, | ||
| countDownloads: `path:"models/default.zip"`, | ||
| }, | ||
| "t5-tts": { | ||
| prettyLabel: "T5-TTS", | ||
| repoName: "T5-TTS", | ||
| repoUrl: "https://github.com/SWivid/F5-TTS", | ||
| filter: false, | ||
| countDownloads: `path_extension:"safetensors" OR path_extension:"pt"`, | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do you know why they went for a solution with both E2_TTS and F5_TTS in the same repo? Doing so doesn't allow for separate counting. If you are in contact with them, would be good to nudge them to split. The current download rule looks good though, no matter if the models get split in 2 repos are not.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. cc @SWivid would you like to have separate download counts for the E2_TTS and F5_TTS checkpoints? If yes, then it makes sense to split them up into 2 separate model repositories. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Would it influences the current spaces using it ?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yes so the current Spaces are assuming both are present in the same model repo, see e.g. https://huggingface.co/spaces/mrfakename/E2-F5-TTS/blob/main/app.py#L53. So updating that would break existing Spaces
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What I would suggest is:
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Agreed! Seperate repos would be better.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Ok, @SWivid would you be up for that? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. sure, i'll take care of it There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @NielsRogge sorry for the delay, just got repo split and E2 removed from F5 repo.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Thanks! Note that both model repos would require |
||
| }, | ||
| tensorflowtts: { | ||
| prettyLabel: "TensorFlowTTS", | ||
| repoName: "TensorFlowTTS", | ||
|
|
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.