Re: [LAD] Summercode 2008: LASH, pt. 3

Fons Adriaensen <fons@email-addr-hidden> writes:

> I fail the see the advantage of D-Bus over e.g. OSC via UDP or TCP.
> Last time I looked at the lash sources, the protocol was really
> just one small step away from OSC - it would have taken an hour
> or two to do the conversion.

The advantage is D-Bus autolaunching of the "server" and better
integration with "desktop".

> Other consideration: any form of session management for the
> systems I'm using would have to be at least a two-layer affair.
>
> There is a first layer of 'system' apss talking to jack and
> creating a working environment - this is all monitoring and
> rendering stuff.
>
> The second level is user sessions, also consisting of several
> apps talking to jack. They *use* this existing environment but
> should not be allowed to modify it.
>
> For anything like lash to be useful here it would need to support
> this layering.

This will be hard without proper integration with a desktop (window
manager) session handler. Something very similar can be achieved using
the "import subsessions" feature that I proposed earlier. I.e. have
system session [auto]loaded and then import (without replace) of user
session[s].

-- 
Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>

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