[gmpi] Re: SDK/API model simplification

On Sunday 17 April 2005 21.51, Tim Hockin wrote:
[...]
> As long as your plugin is compatible, use the same GUID.  If you
> break compatibility, change it.  The metadata certainly needs a
> version field, anyway, so you can have two plugins with the same
> GUID and different version fields.
>
> I guess the host needs to track (GUID, version) tuples to identify
> which plugin to instantiate.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking... I don't really like the idea of 
having to deal with both GUIDs and versions, but OTOH, anything 
seriously useful will have to look something like that anyway. The 
GUID is just a much better way of dealing with that unique ID part.

Anyway, if we decide to do it this way, I think it's pretty important 
that hosts really *do* consider the version fields part of the unique 
IDs for this to work - or Very Bad Things(TM) may happen if a user 
decides to install multiple versions of a plugin with the same GUID. 
(There could be various reasons why a user wants to do that; bugs, 
different sound in certain situations etc.)


//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate

.- Audiality -----------------------------------------------.
|  Free/Open Source audio engine for games and multimedia.  |
| MIDI, modular synthesis, real time effects, scripting,... |
`-----------------------------------> http://audiality.org -'
   --- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---

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