[gmpi] Implementations?
- From: Juhana Sadeharju <kouhia@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 22:51:50 +0200
Hello.
The more I read the discussions here, the more I'm convinced
that this is wrong. We should have public or private host
implementations by now. Implementations which with people could
experiment with the ideas and come up with practical requirements.
Now the discussions are not at practical level. It is great to have
ideas on all kind of new gizmos, but I thought GMPI is only aiming
toward a common plugin standard with existing gizmos. Many new
gizmos are not used in the existing audio software.
Better would be if GMPI would be implemented to existing software.
Claims that such implementations cannot be done before the requirements
is ready sounds unbelievably academic.
Regards,
Juhana
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
- Follow-Ups:
- [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- From: Tim Hockin
- [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- From: Steve Harris
Other related posts:
- » [gmpi] Implementations?
- » [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- » [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- » [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- » [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- From: Tim Hockin
- [gmpi] Re: Implementations?
- From: Steve Harris