[gmpi] Re: Instruments done, moving on to "Plugin Files"



Steve Harris wrote:

On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:19:53AM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:

On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:09:42AM -0600, Mike Berry wrote:

Completely outside of the meta-data licensing issue, I'm not sure that I'm happy with the bundle requirement. Why is it proposed? Is it just to make copying the plugin from one place to another easier? It doesn't seem to make the host's life easier, nor the plugin developers. Anyone want to enlighten me? 

It guarantees a way for a plugin to have a place to package up all sorts
of support files - help, graphics, samples, presets, etc.

Of course, it could be a suggestion, not a requirement.  I really like the
idea that everything is a single file or at least a single dir.



Yeah, agreed its much easier for users. It doesnt have to be an archive
file, a directory is just as good, and no harder for developers IMHO.


What if a bunch of plugins use the same shared dll? Does this mean that every plugin must have a copy of that dll in its directory?

--
Mike Berry
Adobe Systems


----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: