[gmpi] Re: NAMM follow-up, some major decisions to make

  • From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:19:55 -0800

On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 06:16:19PM -0500, fogaudionews wrote:
> so. In fact, this sort of reminds of a lot of projects at work in which the 
> "higher-ups" think they have control over a product by spec-ing the 
> requirements; we probably all know how that goes...

We're not trying to fool anyone.  Those companies are right here,
reading this list.  It's not an illusion, it's a way of ensuring that
they DO have a say, and they won't get lost in the noise.



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

  1. Home
  2. gmpi
  3. Archive
  4. 02-2005