Re: [LAD] Non Session Management

On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 18:31 +0200, Renato wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:35:26 +0200
> thijs van severen <thijsvanseveren@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 2012/3/28 Emanuel Rumpf <xbran@web.de>
> >
> > > Am 28. März 2012 05:46 schrieb David Robillard <d@drobilla.net>:
> > > > On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 03:27 +0200, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> > > >> This allowed the SM to:
> > > >>
> > > >> - tell the user if a certain file is part of any session
> > > >> registered at
> > > the SM
[...]
> if I may add my voice, from a very practical user point of view,
> I agree with thijs. The functionality Emanuel is proposing does sound
> very interesting, and it *would* be very nice to have

The mentioned functionality does not depend on a centralized file store.
That's the point I'm trying to make, it's not "complexity that wins us a
bunch of nice features", it's just complexity.

At most what is required for some of them is the session manager know
about registered /sessions/. This is a dramatically different thing
than building a prison for all /files/. While not bulletproof (you
could have sessions on a removable drive), it's not really a problem
because it doesn't impose anything on apps.

> I.e. I would
> gladly give up some disk space, at least for the present, to have a
> solid, functional and wide adopted session manager (like Non seems to
> be, except for the last requirement).
>
> Of course those having recordings of several gigabytes won't agree with
> me, but again this is just my personal opinion.

Lack of a centralized file store does not mean large files would be
duplicated.

-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