[gmpi] Re: Wrapper plugins
- From: "Angus F. Hewlett" <amulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:17:09 -0500 (EST)
Politics. GMPI as a standard stands or falls by compatibility and by
making things painless for plugin and host developers, and it depends
on this just as much as it does on raw technical merit.
=======================================================
Angus F. Hewlett, Technical Director
FXpansion Audio UK Ltd - http://www.fxpansion.com
=======================================================
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> Hello. Would it make more sense to have first a GMPI plugin system
> and only after then think about more complex things?
>
> What looks odd in this wrapper thing is that why we have to
> care about people who are not willing to write native GMPI
> plugins? If somebody continues writing VST plugins whatever,
> then the hosts should have both GMPI and VST support.
>
> Regards,
> Juhana
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
