On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 09:41:49AM +0200, Thorsten Wilms wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 07:14:05PM -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote: > > > >Either way, everything just works (or not) as it should. > > > > > > > Not to someone not familiar with the internals of how LV2 works. As an > > example(I hate to bring up) how many people do you think could tell you > > how the ineternals of a VST program work. Heck how many do you think > > have an even basic idea of computer programming, much less tell you the > > above. > > What has understanding internals to do with this? > All that will need to be understood is that is-an-LV2 is not > enough to describe a plugin or host. > > > > Again for a programmer and specifically someone familiar with how LV2 > > works, that is fine. For someone that has no concept of programming, > > and just want something that works when(To them) it is supposed to, this > > is a huge screwup that can be fixed relatively easily to be honest. > > Fixed relatively easy how? > > > > Once again, this is not about me I am mentioning this. This is for the > > half dozen people(As of right now, obviously not counting those that I > > have gotten used to linux and how things work that might start again) > > that still come to me wondering why something doesn't 'just work'. > > Do you propose to not have a plugin standard that can be extended for > various current and possible future needs to avoid some possible user > confusion? > > Shall all hosts be forced to support all extensions available so > that a sample editor would have to "support" MIDI plugins?
the problem will be rather: why has this plugin a GUI in ardour and ingen and not in qtractor. while this other plugin has a gui in qtractor and non in ardour and ingen. -- torben Hohn http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
