[gmpi] Re: Out-of-Band: suggestion for rethink
- From: "Vincent Burel" <vincent.burel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:40:32 +0200
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Davis" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 7:49 PM
Subject: [gmpi] Re: Out-of-Band: suggestion for rethink
> its mid-september. the mailing list started in mid-february. that's 7
> months so far. we've actually done a lot, but progress has slowed down
> a lot as time drags on.
i don't think so... but...
> i suspect that if people were motivated, we could be done with a
> review in 4 weeks. i suspect Marc P. would be happy to do the
> CoreAudio review, i'd happily do the VST one although i'm not the most
> obviously qualified person to tackle it, i'm sure Steve H. would be
> willing to tackle the LADSPA one (the simplest of the lot). that means
> we would need reviewers for:
>
> * TDM
> * RTAS
> * MAS
> * DirectX
> * Rewire? DirectConnect?
Let's be motivated so...
> the reviews could be posted anonymously if people are worried about
> corporate relations and all that. or you can forward them all to me
> and i'll rewrite them in my own style. i have no bridges to burn :)
:-)
> >> and what's in that base?
> >
> >This is simple to find if you are focused on a minimal goal : host (2
tracks
> >, 1 master) wants to insert a plug-in (Delay / Gain) . If you do that ,
you
> >get your base. I (and most of the people there) can program that badly in
2
>
> the point is: loads of people have already done this!! we've got lots
> of examples of what happens when people sit down and do this. the
> problem: nobody thinks that any of the results are so much better than
> any of the others that its worth supporting as a GMPI-like standard
> (well, this is one of the problems). this is despite significant
> issues with various aspects of each API, and the general proprietary
> nature of just about all of them. why would the result of a group of
> people from this list working on the exact same problem be any
> different? i think that the last thing we want is another plugin API
> written without a clear model of what the goals are.
easy argument, why trying to do something better so !? if people already did
it and failed !?
Well, i don't want to arg a week with my way of thinking.
So... I follow you.
Vincent Burel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
