[gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 23:14:15 -0700
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 10:34:47PM -0400, B.J. Buchalter wrote:
> I would think that if you have an exact GUID/version match, that the host
> should match to that version, even if a newer version is available.
I think Jeff's point was that a GUID alone should be enough, not a pair of
(GUID, version). If we allow the same GUID to be installed more than
once, then we need to define either a solid heuristic for handling it, or
we need to use more than just GUID.
The only way to avoid the same GUID more than once is to require every
update to have a new GUID. I think that is ludicrous.
> OTOH, does it make sense to extend the meta data of the Plug-ins to contain
> version compatibility info as well as version (e.g. a Plug-in specifies how
This is interesting, but might be venturing deep into the territory of
"corner case". :)
> far forward and back its is compatible with), and the host can then
> determine if it can match a saved state to an installed version of the
> plug-in. As far as I can tell, this is an unresolved issue with the other PI
> specs that I have worked with. If would be very nice for this to just work.
I'm not aginst it, I'm just wary of over engineering a solution to a
problem we don't really have.
I think as long as have a version field, we can mostly leave it up to
hosts to implement as they want, with stong suggestions.
When instantiating a GUID:
Do you have patch data to restore?
Yes: Do you have the specific version installed?
Yes: Do you have a newer version installed?
Yes: Ask the user if they want the newest version or the exact
version.
No: Instantiate the exact version of the GUID.
No: Warn the user, then instantiate the latest version of the
GUID.
No: Instantiate the latest version of the GUID.
Alternatively: Just warn the user that they have multiple versions of the
same GUID and that all instances will use the newest instance. Simple.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
- References:
- [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- From: Tim Hockin
- [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- From: B.J. Buchalter
Other related posts:
- » [gmpi] SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- » [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- From: Tim Hockin
- [gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification
- From: B.J. Buchalter