Re: [LAD] [RFC] LADSPA 1.2

This has been debated already. Several times. For instance, please
follow this (long) thread:

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2004-March/006948.html

While I think that each side of the argument has its merits, in the
end to me it all boils down to: "is lrdf simple and lightweight enough
so it is acceptable to consider it from a practical point of view a
de-facto mandatory extension of ladspa.h for all but the simplest of
hosts and plugins?"

My personal answer is "mmm... okay, I guess" but I don't think we will
ever reach a global consensus on this.

L
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Jun 19 00:15:03 2009