5 Sep
2007
5 Sep
'07
11:18 a.m.
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:51:53AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
On 5 Sep 2007, at 10:52, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:
Does anyone actually use packaged versions of LADSPA plugins? Every time
I've tried to do so, the old versions available in packages would not
compile on my platform, or had fatal stability issues, or were not
available, or were missing components.
Another point is that plugins are frequently required as dependencies,
but not dependencies of other programs as most packaging systems assume.
Rather, they are dependencies of documents. Frequently have I received
some project from someone else only to find I didn't have the plugins
needed to use it. Finding them usually involves a trip to google and
clicking through a handful of download links. Wouldn't it be nice if
there was an automated way to locate plugins? Such a system need not be
strongly centralized any more than say, DNS.
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 11:16:42 Georg
Holzmann wrote:
I don't think it's a particularly great idea myself, it makes it
harder for package maintainers to track plugins if they move from one
package to another. If they stay in both then that's also tricky. Hallo Juuso!
I also was just thinking about something like this - at least for
users
this would be a great help (then its maybe also easier to categorize
plugins into different sections).
However, then one or a few maintainers for this codebase would be
needed
...
In my optimistic vision, the authors of some respected existing plugin
collections would decide to join forces and set up a common
playground. But
things may not always work according to one's wishes -- especially
if he
isn't a plugin author himself...
Are there any such authors listening who could share their thoughts?