Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA Specs ?
From: Likai Liu (news_AT_likai.net)
Date: Tue May 14 2002 - 22:01:38 EEST
Steve Harris wrote:
>On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 09:23:11 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
>
>>I'd prefer "VST". There are dozens of useful plugins, hundreds of
>>developers with some knowledge of it, and demonstrated functionality
>>(albeit with some of the same problems as LADSPA, but signs of them
>>being fixed in the near-term future, and no strong evidence of any
>>deep harm caused by their presence).
>>
>
>VST has some advantages, but the licence situation is murky, its not
>/that/ great and I don't think we gain a lot by following it.
>
>- Steve
>
that's right. If you've read the license agreement carefully, it
disallow you to export the VST technology in any form. That means even
if I write a header file from ground up that complies with the VST, that
would be illegal.
liulk
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue May 14 2002 - 21:54:45 EEST