Re: [LAD] Summercode 2008: LASH as a D-Bus service

On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 10:25 +0000, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
> Bob Ham wrote:
>
> > Of course it needs to handle it. It needs to cleanly shut down due to
> > the catastrophic failure.
>
> You'd want that during live performance? :)

No. But I wouldn't try to automate dealing with it, unless it happened
a lot. But then, if it happened a lot, I'd fix the bug instead.

> In a debug version, it could be desirable, but for "production" use
> (sorry for webspeak) it is unacceptable. It should be as fault-tolerant
> as possible in those situations.

Yes, you're right, JACK should be as fault tolerant as possible :-)

> > I think it's important *to* break the current API due to its many
> > issues. Why do you think that backwards compatibility with the current
> > API is important?
>
> LASH adoption was slow enough to start with. Several projects exist that
> use current LASH, some are quite useful (Hydrogen, Specimen), do you
> want to personally update each and every of those

The issue here is the advancement of Linux Audio in general. Changing
APIs is a short-term issue. IMHO, the long-term benefits of a better
engineered API far outweigh the short-term costs of breaking
compatibility.

Not only that, but the number of applications that support the current
API is very small. And I would indeed personally update the
applications I use. I did it before, LADCCAifying various applications,
from scratch. You may recall that a set of patches were included in
LADCCA releases.

If people wanted to use the current API, they can carry on doing so.
There's no reason they have to update to a newer API; nobody is going to
go into lash-0.5.4.tar.gz on nongnu.org and change the files in it.

Bob

-- 
Bob Ham <rah@email-addr-hidden>
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev