A common plugin repository (WAS:Re: [LAD] ladspa qa?)

Phil Frost indigo at bitglue.com
Wed Sep 5 13:18:51 UTC 2007

On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:51:53AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> On 5 Sep 2007, at 10:52, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:
> >On Wednesday 05 September 2007 11:16:42 Georg Holzmann wrote:
> >>Hallo Juuso!
> >>
> >>I also was just thinking about something like this - at least for  
> >>users
> >>this would be a great help (then its maybe also easier to categorize
> >>plugins into different sections).
> >>
> >>However, then one or a few maintainers for this codebase would be  
> >>needed
> >>...
> >
> >In my optimistic vision, the authors of some respected existing plugin
> >collections would decide to join forces and set up a common  
> >playground. But
> >things may not always work according to one's wishes -- especially  
> >if he
> >isn't a plugin author himself...
> >
> >Are there any such authors listening who could share their thoughts?
> I don't think it's a particularly great idea myself, it makes it  
> harder for package maintainers to track plugins if they move from one  
> package to another. If they stay in both then that's also tricky.

Does anyone actually use packaged versions of LADSPA plugins? Every time
I've tried to do so, the old versions available in packages would not
compile on my platform, or had fatal stability issues, or were not
available, or were missing components.

Another point is that plugins are frequently required as dependencies,
but not dependencies of other programs as most packaging systems assume.
Rather, they are dependencies of documents. Frequently have I received
some project from someone else only to find I didn't have the plugins
needed to use it. Finding them usually involves a trip to google and
clicking through a handful of download links. Wouldn't it be nice if
there was an automated way to locate plugins? Such a system need not be
strongly centralized any more than say, DNS.

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list