[linux-audio-dev] LADSPA Issues
S.W.Harris at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Fri May 20 09:44:15 UTC 2005
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 01:19:58 +0100, Mike Rawes wrote:
> > So why wasn't the unique ID the thing to use? There is a unique plugin
> > ID in LADSPA, if not for this then for what reason?
> Going by what is said on ladspa.org, I think that it was originally intended to
> be the way to refer to plugins, and changed as development progressed.
Yes, thats right IIUC.
> IIRC, the UID is still required to lookup metadata with liblrdf, but this may
> have changed since I last looked.
Thats right, due to the lack of anything better.
> > I'm willing to full-time maintain the site, but I don't really have the
> > hosting/abilities to create it. What do the other plugin authors think
> > about this?
> I'm all for it. Maybe liase with Richard Furse to update the ladspa.org site
> itself? There's already a list of links there so all that is really needed is
> to add details for maintainers willing to adopt plugins, with appropriate
> provisions (kind of plugin, language, build system and so on)?
You have to be carefull here not to put more effort into the site that
youre saving overall... in realtily there aren't very many LADSPA
developers with small numbers of plugins, and distribution maintainers
should be taking care of packaging the notable ones.
More information about the Linux-audio-dev