On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 13:21 -0500, Gabriel Beddingfield wrote:
I don't think that's too abstract for your average dev. It's a library
API. Certainly your average dev can use a library.
Would renaming this "The LV2 SDK(R)(TM)" actually improve anything?
The focus here is wrong. I'm sure there *are* things we can do to ease
adoption even further. Effort into finding and improving those things
would certainly be great. Documentation and a more friendly site, for
Maybe some of those things people tend to _associate with_ an "official
SDK", but this is not the same as needing an official SDK. We are not
Steinberg. Discussing arbitrary silly labels is a waste of time.
Tackling actual problems that impede adoption, though, certainly not a
waste of time. By all means, let's find those things, make a list on
the Wiki, and tackle them.
... Though, that said, I think hand-wavey discussions about "adoption"
and whatever are mostly hot air in general. Developers who have an
actual interest in implementing things will do so, and have done so. I
think the hypothetical situation of a developer who is genuinely about
to do the work being deterred by there being no "official SDK" or
whatever little aesthetic details is a fantasy. I fully support any
effort to make things more friendly at face value, but... whatever,
really. Less talk, more rock.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list