31 May
2009
31 May
'09
9:06 a.m.
Chris Cannam <cannam(a)all-day-breakfast.com> writes:
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Nedko Arnaudov
<nedko(a)arnaudov.name> wrote:
If they are prepared to do DSSI like stuff (the only alternative we have
ATM), they can reuse the DSSI-like universal "wrapper". The code needs
only two defines, UI_EXECUTABLE and UI_URI.
If they are not, then maybe they are looking for in-process UI extension
that is toolkit independent. I have idea about cairo UI extension but it
will require abstracting mouse and keyboard events. Also it will force
plugin authors to use some kind of [custom] widget toolkit based on
cairo.
--
Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>
Invada plugins don't have external UI. If you
are going to add LV2
support to Rosegarden I'll add external UI support to Invada.
I promise.
That is a worthy promise; thank you. But what are the chances of new
plugin developers being prepared to do that extra work themselves, as
a general matter?
(I realise that's a rhetorical question, or at least one you can't be
expected to have the answer to. Fraser might have some thoughts,
perhaps?)