[gmpi] Re: Reqs draft
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:36:05 -0800
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 08:09:08AM +0100, Vincent Burel wrote:
> > The first GMPI hosts won't have a lot of GMPI plugins. That is why
> wrapping
> > VST/DX/AU is so important. We must handle it well.
>
> firstly there won't be GMPI host (exclusively GMPI) before many years
> (except in your kitchen or in the Paul's one). Secondely if we consider
> that GMPI will also bring a better reliability in the plug-in production,
> and a better quality in term of software (bugs minimized because the SDK
> will be clear, well documented, there won't be 5 differents method to make
> this and that and all will be referenced and explained to the plugger and
> the host maker....) WELL !!! if we consider the goal of GMPI, why corrup it
> right now by thinking about wrapping to/from other plug SDK ? to get the
> same problems than todays !?
That is an interesting an unusually optimistic (for you) view point. I like
the idea, but I think reality intrudes some. I concur, that we SHOULDN'T
need it, but then again, I don't think we should preclude it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
