[gmpi] Re: Decision Time: 7.1.2

> Honestly, Tim, if you're not going to answer my questions, then I 
> don't see why I should continue to spend so very much time and energy 
> answering yours.  Like Bill, I'm now officially frustrated.

I've been frustrarted for weeks - we're all dancing in circles and no one
sees eye to eye on ANYTHING.

I didn't answer your questions because I think they are loaded questions.
The same as you did not answer my question.

> >  > >You can guarantee me that no one will do an Int24 plugin for x86?
> >>
> >>  That's not the relevant question.  The relevant questions, IMHO, are:
> >>  Does anybody actually want to do that, and if so, do we think their
> >>  reasons are good enough to justify imposing on all GMPI developers
> >>  the burden that supporting that would incur?
> >
> >Let's get this in the open:  What burden?  Before you read on, please write
> >your answer.  I really honestly don't see how they are not isomorphic.
> >below you will find my view of the development burden.

Do I still beat my wife?  Do I think my proposal is worth all the
extra burden on all GMPI developers?

WHAT BURDEN?  If you think there is a burden, you don't understand my proposal
(or I REALLY missed something).  I'm not trying to be difficult.  I'm trying
to draw out of you what the misunderstanding is (or what it is that I have
missed).

Let's do an excercize, if we can:  I'll describe the profiles approach as I
understand it.  The key is to be OBJECTIVE and not use loaded words.  Then
you describe how you view my position.  This works better in real life, but
let's try it.  Make no assumptions, call out any detail you can think of.
(Can you tell I just got out of a communications class?  It actually works.)


Profiles:  We provide a small number of GMPI-defined 'profiles'  The profile
is a way to define some variables together, such as sample datatype.  Plugin
developers pick the profile that best matches them.  Plugins announce to the
host (in some way) that they are profile X.  Host developers pick the
profile that best matches them.  If a plugin is not the same profile as a
host, it can't be loaded, or needs some profile adaptor.

Hosts might support more than one profile, at their discretion.

Once a profile is picked, plug developers can assume that all their I/O is
of the profile's datatype and host developers can assume that the profile's
datatype is sufficient for all plugs.

It may be advantageous to allow plugins to support more than one profile.
In that case, the plugin will need to get the profile to use from the host,
and select it's own code path properly (several ways to do this).

Did I miss anything?


If this is not orking for you - I BEG you - let's get on IRC or AIM or the
TELEPHONE.  I'll be happy to call you at my expense, to sort this out.  Or
you can call me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules:  Please stay on topic.  You are responsible for your own
words.  Please respect your fellow subscribers.  Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.

Archive: http://www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts: