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

On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 09:02:49AM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 09:12:14AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> > > I'm still willing to consider the compromise of "if there is no metadata,
> > > then you must probe" if I HAVE to, but I find dualities like that to be
> > > silly and a symptom of design-by-committee.  We are designing with a
> > > committee, but I think we can do better than being obvious about it :)
> > 
> > Why do you need the duality? Dont provide for metadata in the object file
> > (it cant do anything that an external file cant).
> 
> Because some plugins are inherently not static.  A VST wrapper, for
> example.  In order for you to know which wrapped plugins are available,
> you have to have the wrapper (a GMPI plug) probe at least once, and really
> once whenever you add/remove a VST plugin.
> 
> So if you have to do it for some, just let it be done for all?  One
> mechanism full-stop. ?
> 
> Is this external meta-data *really* going to save much time?

Resending - last open item....

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