[LAD] LV2 " isn't well thought out ?" LV2 in the Reaper sequencer

[Dave Robillard]

On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 14:33 +0100, hollunder at gmx.at wrote:
> FYI, I talked to Justin and tried to get him over here, but he won't
> join the discussion. 
> In his opinion there's too much zealotism here and thus he sees it as a
> waste of time. Also, regarding the initial quote he said that it was an
> opinion rather than a statement of fact.
> 
> I would have liked to see a discussion, whatever the outcome may have
> been.
> Looks like it's not gonna happen.

I don't think trying to 'sell' LV2 to commercial projects is a good idea
right now anyway (and I don't think anyone else who actually knows LV2
does either).

Keep in mind LV2 is almost exactly LADSPA equivalent in functionality -
plus extensibility.  There is still a lot of work to be done before
it's a replacement for VST3 or whatever.

As far as zealotism, they're the ones whining for an open standard...

VST is bad?  Why?  Because it's closed?

Zealots! Open this and open that, we don't need to hear about your
religion, comrade stalin, blah blah blah.

Oh.  So you can be pro-"open" and not be a zealot?

Gee, who knew?

-DR-