Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

>
> This is intentional. LV2 is not intended to include every single
> feature that everyone might want. It is intended for it to
> be /possible/ to implement any feature someone might want (this is why
> LV2 actually exists in a useful state and, say, GMPI does not...)

While this makes perfect since in flexibility from a programmer
perspective, I wonder how it will affect things from an end-user
perspective, especially if LV2 becomes popular(Which many hope it would)...

The end user will have some plugins that are 'LV2' that will work in
some 'LV2' hosts but not others. How are they to know? Will they have
to have 'LV2 and supports these features' that they will have to check
off every time to see if it should be working or not?

Or 'Profiles' that fit a certain set of features?

Don't get me wrong, I love how flexible LV2 is intended to be. However
without some baseline for it, there are some definite concerns when
writing plugins in as far as compatibility for an end-user that may not
know to check every last little additional function.

Perhaps LV2 should by default include extensions that encompass the
points brought up here instead of dismissing them as capable of being
done, as if they can be done in one host, not nesseccarily in all, then
you have one giant mass of confusion in as far as what plugins can be
sued here, there or whatever, and instead of a standard plugin format,
we have a giant clusterf**k.

I apologize to anyone offended by the last statement in advance, but I
could not come up with a better way to describe it.

             Seablade
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed May 9 20:15:02 2007