3 Mar
2011
3 Mar
'11
1:27 a.m.
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 18:02 -0500, Paul Giblock wrote:
I suppose I don't mean to attack lv2. It is a good
extensible format,
and is the product of much dedication, especially on Dave's part. I
could write my own extension and be done with it. But then we end up
with a situation like the external UI is today.
My concern is if we would ever have a standard extension for this kind
of thing when the primary maintainer considers the idea stupid, dumb,
or broken.
I have said numerous times that GL plugin UIs would be a good thing to
do. There is a difference between me personally wanting to spend time
inventing it, and thinking it would be a fine thing for somebody to do.
If I (or any other implementer) thought it was /broken/, then yes, you
would get fragmentation problems - as you should. This isn't broken,
it's just not my thing. To reuse my strained metaphor, there is a lot of
fundamental engine work that needs doing before I care whatsoever about
that paint.
Anyway, I'd actively like to see GL UIs, since I have a host that's a
modular canvas and you could do some pretty awesome things there - but
that doesn't mean I think high performance waveforms and visualizations
and whatever is important, or anything but fluff...
...but that, in turn, doesn't mean I would try to block the tech from
being made. The tech is fine. If anyone wants to invent it, please go
right ahead.
-dr