>>
>> I'll throw in my 2 Euro cents.
>>
>> If the VideoJACK crowd feels that JACK2 development is taking too
>> slow and decide to continue with their fork, may I suggest that we
>> all still discuss and draft a proper video API together? If a fork
>> happens out of practical reasons, it would be best to make sure
>> that switching video software to use JACK2 later on will be as
>> painless as possible.
>>
>> Technical issues aside, I wish that those affiliated with VideoJACK
>> do not feel that their needs are neglected by the JACK developers.
>> I hope that the recent discussion has proved that people in this
>> camp are willing to improve JACK in this respect. Perhaps we could
>> move on and try to find more common ground?
>>
>> Juuso
>
> Yes sure.
>
> Where is the latest state of the video patch for jack? I can have a
> look and see how easy/difficult it would be to implement that in a
> jackdmp/jack2 branch.
>
> Stephane
>
>
It seems like porting the "video patch" to jackdmp/jack2 code base in
a video branch should be quite easy. I can start working on that, if
you think this is appropriate.
Stephane
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Thu May 8 04:15:03 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 08 2008 - 04:15:03 EEST