On Mar 13, 2006, at 6:15 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
A good example would be the DSSI stuff. The fluidsynth plugin code would be in "imports" and the Windows and Mac OS X parts of the Makefile would include the source code in imports. The GNU/Linux part would look in the standard system locations for that stuff.
Well, I guess I misunderstood what should go in imports, and maybe I do have objections: I thought, "imports" was to be intended for libraries, that are required by Pd externals and maybe Pd itself, but not for standalone applications independent from Pd, as the DSSI plugins are? The DSSI folks have their own Sourceforge project, they have their own release system, and their applications are not required to run Pd at all.
I'm still against packaging DSSI, LADSPA or VST plugins with Pd. If the DSSI folks or Steinberg need help to provide binary plugins, then that doesn't concern Pd and thus doesn't belong in the Pd CVS, IMO. Everyone may feel free to give them a hand at ladspa.org or dssi.sf.net but this has got nothing to do with Pd.
I give up on the plugin issue.
Without including them as binaries, only a handful of people who are willing to spend a day figuring out how to compile them will ever use them. For the thousands of Pd users who just want to make art, they will not use the DSSI plugins.
I guess in a couple years, there will be some DSSI packages for people to use...
.hc
________________________________________________________________________ ____
News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is publicity.
- Bill Moyers