Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA 2 decision points

On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 02:22:09PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
> > B) RDF syntax: RDF/Turtle seems a lot more popular in these parts than
> > RDF/XML. We could mandate Turtle for all LADSPA metadata.
>
> Personally I think it's ugly and strange and arbitrary and just weird
> all around, but whatever. I don't really care. :)

*shrug* less of the evils. I'm kinda fond of Turtle, its not XML, but its
easy for humans to read and write.
 
> > E) Bundles: no-one screamed when I suggested it, but its a bit different to
> > LADSPA 1's /lib directory. Hosts would be required to allow the plugin
> > link to libraries in the bundle if they need to (this is why OPENSTEP did
> > it, I guess its done by setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH, but I dont know), which
> > is a bit more work, but makes moving plugins between machines easier. Oh,
> > and the plugins needs to have the path of its bundle passed to it when its
> > instantiated, which isn't in the API right now.
>
> I like the bundle idea, but I thik we need to have a long hard think
> about this WRT distro package management systems and FHS compliance. We
> do need some way of allowing plugins to load libraries though, but is it
> really necessary to do the DLL Hell thing to allow it?

It's not really DLL Hell, but yes, it needs thought.

- Steve
Received on Sun Apr 23 00:15:19 2006