20 Apr
2006
20 Apr
'06
2:56 p.m.
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 09:47:40 +0100, Daniel James wrote:
Hi Steve,
It's a tricky issue. It something that's actually easier on other
platforms where plugins tend to be distributed individually, or in small
groups. Doing that with source would be a right pain, and primarily
distribuing linux plugins as binaries seems a bit wierd.
I guess it would make sense for the distributions to do that though, but
I've no idea how you'd break them up.
- Steve
Yery good idea, I've been wanting to do that
for a long time, but I've
never had time.
I agree this is a good time to do it, but I suggest we make it
plugins.linuxaudio.org rather than ladspa.linuxaudio.org so we can
include DSSI plugins and any future formats under the same umbrella.
Also, I've been wondering recently about plugin classification and the
way that plugins are packaged by the various distros. I think there's
scope for some smaller packages that include the plugins a user would be
most likely to need, maybe separated out into effects and synth plugins.
For example, we currently include about 220 LADSPA plugins in 64 Studio,
but I don't think I ever use more than a dozen of those in my own
studio. Even then, some of the AMS demos don't work because we don't
have all the plugins they need.