9 May
2007
9 May
'07
3:52 p.m.
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:28 -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
I don't think that is going to be a big problem. Though it's certainly
possible to write a proprietary LV2 host, I think it's safe to say that
most of them, in the foreseeable future, will be free software. So once
one host has implemented an extension, there will be actual code for
that implementation available to everyone else. Sure, different hosts
may have very different codebases, but it's still just a matter of
adaptation, not writing from scratch.
I think the best thing is to only define the core spec for now, see what
extensions pop up, which of them are useful or popular, which of them
make sense to use together etc, and then define some additional
structure or profiles or something else if needed.
--ll
I don't
think there is any huge danger of that happening. People will
probably mostly use a few popular hosts, plugin writers will make sure
that their plugins work in those hosts (if feasible) and host writers
will try to support as many plugins as possible. I guess it depends on
how creative (or how disciplined) LV2 programmers are.
I think that is being either very optimistic or pessimistic, or both at
the same time(If that is possible). Writing plugins for a few specific
hosts is a good idea, of course then you are limiting the capabilities
of others also developed with LV2 as they might not be able to support
all extensions out of the box quickly enough to become popular. As much
as I love Ardour, I would hate for it to be the only option out there,
then we are back to Pro-Tools all over again.