Re: [LAD] LV2 " isn't well thought out ?" LV2 in the Reaper sequencer

On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 09:59 +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2008, at 00:50, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> >
> > Calm down guys, Benno is just a bit frustrated about the apparently
> > low
> > interest of LV2 becoming a broad standard. The misplaced attributes
> > here and
> > there are just caused by this frustration, and hey, it's quite
> > pointless to
> > argue about this issue, because it's not our business anyway. :)
> > I'm sure the Reaper guys will seek a dicussion theirselfes in case
> > they're
> > really interested in the LV2 issue.
>
> That's fair enough, but it's very early in the day, LV2 has only been
> finalised for a few weeks, and it's not even widely adopted internally
> by LAD people, so I wouldn't expect commercial software people to be
> that interested yet.
>
> To my mind it's better for us to develop a large suite of tools and
> plugins to demonstrate the viability and advantages before we go
> courting other implementations.

Definitely agreed. 10 minutes hacking is worth 10 hours arguing on web
forums.

There's no better PR than "look at what we can do". Good technology
sells itself :)

-DR- (who is currently implementing things in LV2 far beyond what VST or
AU could hope to ever do)

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Jan 23 20:15:16 2008