Revisiting this thread to keep the discussion going in light of the Artifacts proposal.
@EA4GPZ I think your proposal makes sense and can be well accommodated within the new Artifacts scheme. Would you agree?
@surligas & @Acinonyx can you provide some input on the last post by @EA4GPZ ?
A clarification for your proposal @EA4GPZ would be that we can go both ways. Have the demodulators up to bitstream on the client but also provide plugin options for framing as it will be needed in cases of TC&C (done locally on the client). Either case the important point for now is to validate the Artifacts proposal so we can make sure it is futureproof.
On a more general note: It is sad to see duplication between two open source projects with common goals and vision. I am sure we can find a way to de-duplicate and move forward stronger together.