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

[pete shorthose]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:23:25 +0000
"Patrick Shirkey" <pshirkey at boosthardware.com> wrote:

> On 12:49:52 pm 01/22/08 Dave Phillips <dlphillips at woh.rr.com> wrote:
> > t_w_ at freenet.de wrote:
> > >  Dave Phillips wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>  So responding with sarcasm, "We'll do it my way or not at all"
> > >>  conditions, and a confrontive attitude qualifies as "the spirit
> > >>  of collaboration" ? Geez, you guys are really winning me over.
> > >>
> > >
> > >  It's the good right of Dave and Lars to not care or even outright
> > >  reject closed software. They could have said it more diplomatic
> > >  terms ... but now you make a drama of it.
> > Do I ?
> >
> > Well, maybe it's because I have the good right to do so. :)
> >
> > Look, I'm trying to remind people here that what they say here can
> > make or break involvement with Linux audio (which is in fact a much
> > larger world than the one represented here). As a point, let me ask:
> > How many new developers have joined the Ardour team in the past two
> > years ? How many projects represented here have found an adequate
> > supply of talent to cover all their development bases ? Can we really
> > afford to sour *anyone* on the possibilities of Linux audio ? Is it
> > really too much to ask that we remain civil even to those who seem to
> > represent the opposite side ?
> >
> 
> I fully support Lars and DR on this one.
> 
> The Nullsoft guy publicly disses the work of many LAD'ers which has gone
> ahead despite several years of delays and even in the wake of a so called
> collaborative closed community effort to establish a universal plugin
> format which took away valuable resources and blatently ignored the
> established methods of open development.
> 
> 
> He didn't bother to ask one of the dev's if his concerns/questions could be
> answered with a simple email and he implies that the spec for LV2 is not
> well thought out.
> 
> 
> Why should they even respond to his feedback?

because apparently, he is wrong. thus, it's a missed opportunity for him to 
leverage a good plugin api and a missed opportunity for us to get LV2 to a wider
audience. lose lose.

neither side demonstrated due dilligence and it's not like it matters anyway.
it's up to those with an interest in both LV2 and it's implementation in
reaper to follow up imo, from a purely pragmatic perspective.

pete.