Re: [LAD] Fwd: LS licensing (was: LV2 " isn't well thought out ?" LV2 in the Reaper sequencer)

From: alex stone <compose59@email-addr-hidden>
Date: Tue Jan 29 2008 - 16:28:41 EET

Paul,
I'll be the first to admit i know little about Pulseaudio, and what it can
do. And i mean no offence or dismissal of Alsa and it's role.
So where will Pulse Audio take us in the future? Jack's been outstanding for
me, and as a means of porting and moving audio, and i hope midi around, i've
never found better. My...'enthusiasm ' is based on my experiences so far
with Jack and Jackdmp, and they are good. Frankly, they've been a delight to
use, and make the working day a great deal more pleasant, and less hassle.
What will Pulseaudio do that will make the process of using audio and midi
easier and more efficient?

Alex.

On Jan 29, 2008 5:15 PM, Paul Davis <paul@email-addr-hidden> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 15:44 +0300, alex stone wrote:
>
> >
> > To offer a counterweight to this, have all you craftsmen considered
> > getting together in a concentrated team effort, free of politics, and
> > indulge in an intense push to expand Jack and Jackdmp (for example) to
> > incorporate kernel level audio, with modules, and do away with alsa
> > altogether? Now that WOULD be something to talk about, and a wonderful
> > incentive for developers to come together as one, with a common goal
> > for the greater good. Jack is already 'king of the empire', in my
> > humble opinion, and would expand it's grip on the planet even further
> > with this final step towards ONE complete linux audio and midi
> > solution.
>
> PulseAudio is the ONE complete Linux audio solution (don't know about
> MIDI). It is also cross-platform, which is nice.
>
> JACK was never designed to be easy to use for desktop and office
> productivity apps; PulseAudio is and has interfaces to/from JACK. The
> only thing that JACK has "wanted" (to the extent that an
> API/library/server can want anything) is for audio programming in
> general to move to a pull model (driven by the audio interface) the way
> it is with CoreAudio and ASIO, and away from the push model (driven by
> the desire of the application). Even this is not strictly necessary if
> the application doesn't care about latency.
>
> Nothing would be gained by putting JACK "inside" the kernel. You seem to
> be forgetting that the hard part of audio i/o is actually interacting
> with the h/w devices. As much as there may be many reasons to use as
> little of the ALSA user-space API as possible, something still has to
> handle all the hardware. ALSA does that pretty well.
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Jan 29 20:15:04 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 29 2008 - 20:15:12 EET