[openbeos-midi] Re: activity/status?

  • From: "Martijn Sipkema" <msipkema@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <openbeos-midi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 07:32:39 +0100

> >implemented anything? I saw on the list archives that you were
> >planning on implementing the old midi kit. Why do you not start
> >with the midi2 kit?
>
> Because it isn't documented, no applications (that I know of) were written
for it,
> and it is really outside the scope of an R1, in a way. Additionally,
implementing
> JUST a midi2 kit would not give us backward compatability.

I wrote some applications for the midi2 kit: 1808, 2488, 2489 on bebits.
Also apps 1494, 1576, 2201, 2228, 2418 are for the midi2 kit. There
aren't that many applications for the old midi kit either and it really is
obsolete.

> >Also, there are not that many midi applications
> >for beos and for most the source is not available, so even complete
> >source code compatibility is not needed. The midi2 kit in beos 5
> >contained several bugs and was never documented. In dano it
> >behaved differently. If I can do anything to help, say so. I'm
> >working on a midi api for *nix.
>
> We could definately use some help. But midi2 is in the same catagory as
> the new interface kit and others. Probably better, but not backward
compatible
> with previous apps, so not in R1.

That's ok.

> OTOH, much of the work for midi would be the
> same for midi2 (i.e. parsing midi files, reading and writing to the serial
ports, synth,
> etc). So the difference between the two should not be 2X as much effort.

For drivers you should probably take a look at ALSA.

--martijn


Other related posts: