29 Jul
2011
29 Jul
'11
8 p.m.
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 13:56 +0200, Olivier Guilyardi wrote:
Hello David,
On 07/27/2011 01:44 AM, David Robillard wrote:
No I don't. Do you have any concrete reason why that would be the case,
that isn't eliminated by simply clearly pointing to good implementations
on the LV2 site?
Lilv is a library you can use to implement LV2. I have put a lot of
effort into making it as palatable and appropriate as a "standard"
implementation as possible, and even implemented an entirely new minimal
RDF stack for that purpose, so by all means, please us it. Why does
there have to be more to it than that?
Why should anyone use some weird authoritarian privilege to cram some
standard implementation down everyone's throats? What benefit does
silly labels like "official" actually provide anyone? If anything, I
would like to see the exact opposite, more involvement in LV2 itself
from others (which is happening a lot lately, which is great). I have
no interest in making LV2 a David Robillard dictatorship any more than
is absolutely necessary to keep the project afloat, maintain the site,
etc. I only reluctantly have delved down into low-level plugin
architecture issues to be honest, believe me, I would *love* for that to
be done (or the torch passed) so I can write some actually user-visible
software for a change. Free libraries and specifications neither pay
the bills nor show non-hackers what it is you do.
Lilv, Serd, and Sord (and everything else at drobilla.net) are very much
*mine*. LV2 is not. I consider this distinction important and strive
to maintain it.
On a more technical level, specifications are a lot more timeless and
widely useful than implementations.
Don't get me wrong, I think the site should be reworked to be as
friendly as possible, to make finding appropriate implementations as
easy as possible, and all that, but declaring an "official SDK" or
whatever just strikes me as silly. You're basically asking if I think
modularity is bad. No, I very emphatically do not think that at all. ;)
-dr
For the sake of the record, serd, sord, and lilv
are not LV2 extensions
and are not found at http://lv2plug.in. Serd and sord are minimal RDF
syntax/store libraries (respectively), and not LV2 specific (though
deliberately suitable for implementing LV2). Lilv is an LV2 host
library that uses serd and sord. Serd, sord, and Lilv can be found at
http://drobilla.net
I understand that you want LV2 to be a standard and only a standard, and thus
only show its specification on http://lv2plug.in. You seem to consider that
serd, sord and lilv are helper libraries and only one route amongst other
possible routes to host LV2 plugins. This is consistent in /principle/, but do
you not something feel like such "modularity" can be confusing, when compared
to
existing major plugin technologies which provide everything as an SDK? Do you
not feel like a complete LV2 SDK would be more developer friendly, in /practice/?