Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA extension mechanisms
From: Kai Vehmanen (kaiv_AT_wakkanet.fi)
Date: Mon Apr 09 2001 - 01:48:10 EEST
On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Jim Peters wrote:
> This is a really weird group, you know. I feel like I'm in a large
> dark empty room, and I'm talking a little too loud because I don't
> know what might be lurking in the shadows, and hearing an echo would
> at least help me feel a little less nervous.
No worry about that, LAD is quite a relaxed forum. :) I've been on the
list since 1999, and I don't think there has been even one flamewar!
That's quite a achievement for any discussion forum. ;)
Another thing that separates LAD from lists like linux-kernel,
linux-sound, alsa-devel, etc is that we don't have a common project (or
goal) we work for. Most LAD people are committed to their own projects,
and are here mainly for general audio/linux/sw-design discussions.
This is also why LADSPA is such an important thing for us. To this day, it
is the only really succesful group effort here on LAD. And believe me, the
discussions that led to the current ladspa.h were not easy. If we had
continued to discuss all the various "advanced" features, I think we'd
still be arguing... (ie. no LADSPA).
But back to today. Even though LADSPA API was frozen, we all agreed that
there are situations where a more flexible plugin API would be useful (or
even required). So discussions continued (mainly around the MAIA plugin
API). We've also being talking about plugin GUIs (XML/standalone), offline
processing, presets, sample accurate events, using interleaving for
passing multiple channels of audio, hard-rt requirements, etc, etc...
So your proposal fits in rather well. And one thing to remember is that
usually when people say "x shouldn't be added to LADPSA" means that "x
should be added to MAIA/LADXPA (eXtreme :))/etc... instead".
-- http://www.eca.cx Audio software for Linux!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Apr 09 2001 - 02:22:12 EEST