Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA proposal ...

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA proposal ...
From: jaromil (jaromil_AT_dyne.org)
Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 22:50:08 EEST


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

re,

On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 08:17:30PM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 05:45:58 +0100, Mike Rawes wrote:
> > > Will it be possible for the same plugin to implement both v1 and
> > > v2?
> > >
> > > (I would have thought that was probably a necessity, but then I
> > > don't write plugins.)
> >
> > Ooh. That's a good point...
> >
> > I've written a few plugins, and the thought of maintaining two versions of
> > otherwise identical plugins doesn't appeal. It is possible to combine two
> > versions in the source, and determine which version to build at compile time.
>
> My vague plan was to stop supporting v1 directly and to provide a v1
> meta plugin wrapper that presents my v2 plugins via a v1 interface.
>
> The alternaive is that I stop supporting v1 alltogether. The old versions
> will still be avialable ofcourse.

gosh, i'm just writing a library for video plugins, inspired to LADSPA

"inspired" means that it is about a simple header, which doesn't
requires a library. see
http://livido.dyne.org/livido-22apr04.tar.gz

we are allready quite some people focusing on it, from different
emerging video applications as FreeJ, VeeJay, PD/PDP, LiVES

what do you say guys, on the long term it's really bad to have this
header-oriented spec? or you're doing the change just now that everybody
joined the train, wouldn't have been a good choice since the beginning? ;>

i'm not provoking, i'm just trying to learn :)

from what i could really understand from this thread. the header/lib
dependency is the main thing which differentiates the LADSPA v1 from v2,
seen from an architectural point of view.

would have been a good choice since the beginning, to have it as a lib?

thanks & respect,

- --
 jaromil, dyne.org rasta coder, http://rastasoft.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Cryptographically signed mail, see http://gnupg.org

iD8DBQFApSLwWLCC1ltubZcRAohEAJ95ZHdJ+8KfIvKDks83yFvi71/WDACePJPO
EZgd5JGmJcvE09DfrupTeq0=
=LF+l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri May 14 2004 - 22:44:48 EEST