[LAD] "enhanced event port" LV2 extension proposal

Krzysztof Foltman wdev at foltman.com
Fri Nov 30 11:10:41 UTC 2007

Dave Robillard wrote:

> MIDI.  In short: don't rock the boat; all this Jack/LV2 MIDI stuff is
> still getting off the ground...

Well, I see your point. Again, I'll start worrying (or defining
extensions) when it'll be necessary.

Don't you think that there should be a sort of "extension TODO list"? As
you see, I already have certain things in mind, and so do others.

> No it isn't, it's extremely elegant.  What's inelegant is cramming too
> much garbage into an extension when that garbage is a separate problem.

Both are the extreme ends of the same spectrum, I think.

> You want to define a new event type?  Define it!  No consensus, no
> debates, no fuss, no muss.  

That's right. On the other hand, sometimes extension designed by some
guy and then adopted because there was nothing better available, limits
growth of the scene/market (there's enough resistance to a change to
prevent better standards from being adopted).

Think IPv4 vs IPv6 (turning a blind eye to a popular opinion that IPv6
is a complex, bloated piece of junk ;) ).

> If that's not elegant, I don't know what is ;)

Maybe all it lacks is a set of well-thought-out well-defined extensions
to start things up?

Or maybe the "invisible hand of the scene" will sort things out by itself.


More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list