26 Jun
2009
26 Jun
'09
8:58 a.m.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 3:02 AM, Stefano D'Angelo<zanga.mail(a)gmail.com> wrote:
* LADSPA header asks hosts to identify plugins by
filename and label,
which implies:
- two plugins with same UniqueID and/or label are different plugins (lame);
- files containing sessions/patches/etc. are not portable beetween
different systems or different versions of the same system (lame).
I always interpreted "filename" as meaning base name (i.e. the bit
between the last "/" and the .so) myself, which avoids both of these
problems.
* LV2 identifies plugins by URI, which means:
- in case of multiple plugins with the same URI someone has to decide
which one to use - the host, maybe by choosing according to the
discovery order (bad for the unaware end user, and maybe even
inconsitent in case the two bundles are in the same directory) or the
user (better, but maybe a bit harder to handle in support libraries
like SLV2?).
I imagine LV2 requires that plugins with identical URIs should behave
identically.
* DSSI header file does not specify how a DSSI plugin
should be
identified by the host
IIRC the RFC mentions filename+label (and includes a stern warning not
to use LADSPA "unique" IDs).
* what about VAMP? (VampPluginDescriptor.identifier
maybe??)
Library base name plus identifier (i.e. basically the same as my
interpretation of the LADSPA/DSSI case).
* VAMP: default paths (we could use Vamp SDK's
ones?).
A host would need a pretty good reason to do anything else; the paths
are documented, and all existing hosts use the SDK to load their
plugins from it anyway.
Chris