On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:42 PM, J. Liles <malnourite@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
the metadata API has already been designed. it is, as usual, all about someone finding the motivation and time to implement it.
anyone is free to submit a patch that takes the basic structure of the MIDI support and "genericizes" it. of course, that person would have to decide which branch of jack they want to support, so ... grrrr.
even so, *if* this device is really something like the UAD or TC or other external DSP units, then i'm not convinced that a JACK client is the most appropriate or useful implementation, though it would certainly be an option.
On the other hand, if JACK had generic message ports and metadata as described here: [http://non.tuxfamily.org/wiki/index.php?page=JackWishList] the thing might be most appropriately developed as a simple JACK client...On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:50 PM, J. Liles <malnourite@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A 'driver' using libmapper [http://www.idmil.org/software/libmapper] would be more appropriate than a plugin, I think.
for a control device, probably yes. but for a device that does audio i/o and/or audio processing, probably not.
the metadata API has already been designed. it is, as usual, all about someone finding the motivation and time to implement it.
anyone is free to submit a patch that takes the basic structure of the MIDI support and "genericizes" it. of course, that person would have to decide which branch of jack they want to support, so ... grrrr.
even so, *if* this device is really something like the UAD or TC or other external DSP units, then i'm not convinced that a JACK client is the most appropriate or useful implementation, though it would certainly be an option.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
