[gmpi] Re: [gmpi][API] +++ RESET +++ (Busses)

  • From: David Olofson <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 00:56:05 +0100

On Wednesday 12 February 2003 00.01, Marc Poirier wrote:
> > However, I think at this time we should discuss criteria. If an
> > existing "standard" meets those, it should be a base for GMPI.
> Or "could" be a base.  ;-)  There are two questions that precede
> the "should":
> (1)  Do folks agree that they want to start from another format?

Too early to say... We might figure out something radically different=20
and infinitely superior here! ;-)

> (2)  Will the owners of the most loved format agree to give it up
> to a standards body?

Well, if XAP would fit the bill, no problem, as long as it stays as=20
Free as we need it to be for our own use.

<legal stuff>
LGPL (not GPL!) should work, I think. Works fine for libs and stuff=20
used in other proprietary software, and it's fine with us. MIT, BSD=20
or similar would probably be ok as well, but all it provides extra is=20
that you can modify the SDK without releasing your changes, and that=20
you don't have to mention XAP/GMPI if you're using it in a product.=20
LGPL for the API headers and MIT or BSD for the plugin and host SDKs?=20
Though there is a concistency point in keeping SDK components=20
identical across hosts and plugins, so I don't quite see the point in=20
not using the LGPL for everything but the examples.
</legal stuff>

> Ron Kuper said that CakeWalk is fully willing to give up control of
> DXi.

Great - but AFAIK, even though COM *is* somewhat portable (in theory,=20
at least - there are Un*x implementations), this isn't exactly an=20
ideal base for an API that's supposed to be highly portable.

> Wolfgang (I think that was his name) from Steinberg said that
> we should all adopt VST as the "standard," but that Steinberg is
> definitely NOT willing to give up control of VST to a standards
> body (don't ask me to try to explain that, I'm just the messanger).

/me thinks Steinberg does not understand what a standard is...

Which means that if GMPI =3D=3D VST, we're out, and XAP will become Yet=20
Another Plugin API. We really can't compromize on that, whether we'd=20
want to or not. (Legal reasons.)

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

=2E- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
   --- 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: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts: