Re: [LAD] Non Session Management

On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 14:11 +0200, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Am 28. März 2012 05:42 schrieb David Robillard <d@drobilla.net>:
> > On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 14:24 +0200, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> > I am having a hard time imagining anything *less* likely to be adopted
> > than trying to cram a *database* down everyone's throats to save some
> > files! ;)
> >
> With database here, actually, I'm refering to a more or less simple text format.
> for example, recently I stumbled about: GNU recutils
> (readable, but it is slow)
[...]
> Did you ever re-assign 200 symlinks ?
> Compare that with a simple search-and-replace in a textfile, with an
> editor of your choice.

In addition to not being archivable by any archive tool, and not
transparent to file system tools, anything but normal files means you
don't have normal app state in the session anymore, but need some kind
of mechanism to ask for every single file. This means loading code gets
weird and depends on the session manager, and the app's session format
also depends on whether or not it was saved with the session manager.

Apps are not going to go for that, period. It should be obvious by now
that a prerequisite for a session manager that is actually going to be
adopted is it doesn't ram a bunch of annoyance down implementer's
throats.

Any such annoyance needs a very compelling argument to counteract that.
I don't see one here. A sufficiently "compelling" argument would be
something important that works that could not work without all the
additional junk.

-dr

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Mar 28 20:15:02 2012