On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Gene Heskett<gene.heskett@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>
> PA is one of the biggest screwups ever, but red hat can't see it.
This type of response is incredibly unhelpful. Lennart and others
involved with PA have made their goals clear, their design assumptions
clear, their overall design philosophy clear, and their use cases
clear. PA continues to evolve toward fulfilling all of these.
How is that a screwup? What other system, real or proposed, is
attempting to tackle the issues that PA is? You can argue that the use
cases don't matter to you, you can argue that PA needs to be "more
optional", you can suggest that some of the design assumptions are
wrong, and so on. But how is it a "screwup"? How does labelling it in
this way help anything? Even if PA isn't "about" anything that you
think is important, enough other people with different goals and use
cases have decided that it very much is about things that matter very
much to them and the user groups they try to serve.
I would really like it if Lennart continued participating in this
thread, and with the LAD community in general, but he has pretty ample
reason not to given the tone of this kind of response.
--p
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Jun 23 20:15:02 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jun 23 2009 - 20:15:02 EEST