Le 23 juin 09 à 17:04, Paul Davis a écrit :
> 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
I would certainly help if we can keep the discussion on "technical
issues" a bit more, since I don't think the subject is completely
closed yet...
(like the issue with sched-rt-group thing for instance... http://ww2.cs.fsu.edu/~rosentha/linux/2.6.26.5/docs/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt)
Stephane
_______________________________________________
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 - 20:15:03 EEST