[linux-audio-dev] Re: LADSPA2 name early consensus

[Carlo Capocasa]

Well, that's a little like saying 'Would you rather go to McDonalds or
that new burger joint nobody knows that might be a lot better but also
might be a lot worse?'

Perhaps if a new name is to be decided the benevolent dictator should
simply decide a new name is to be given and it is up to us to decide which.

Carlo

Steve Harris schrieb:
> OK, it seems like the consensus is clear to me. So far, most people want to
> use/keep LADSPA2. I ran it through a condorcet program, just to make sure,
> but it't not in doubt. FWIW, by my count the pure "acceptable" numbers
> came out as:
> 
>   17 ladspa2
>    7 xap
>    6 peep
>    5 apa
>    4 sax
>    4 plux
>    3 rap
>    2 peeper
>    2 eep
>    1 wasap
>    1 sap
>    1 pea
>    1 openplux
>    1 lapa
>    1 fap
>    1 clap
>    1 chap
> 
> And the condorcet pattern was:
> 
>    9 ladspa2
>    1 ladspa2>apa>sax
>    1 ladspa2>plux
>    1 ladspa2>sap>xap>peep>peeper>sax>fap>eep>clap>chap>apa>rap>pea>wasap>rap
>    1 ladspa2>lapa>plux>xap
>    1 openplux>plux>ladspa2
>    1 peep
>    1 peeper>peep>apa
>    1 plux>apa>ladspa2
>    1 sax>eep>xap
>    1 xap>apa>ladspa2
>    1 xap>peep
>    1 xap>rap>peep
>    1 xap>sax>peep>ladspa2
> 
> Only 23% of those voters would find LADSPA2 unacceptable, next best is XAP
> which 68% would find unacceptable.
> 
> I wasn't especially rigourous, so I may have missed, or misinterpreted
> someones vote. Someone could poll the LAU list if they felt inclined.
> 
> I think that we should give the people who's names appear on the original
> .h file a veto, as were doing some radical changes to the design - though
> hopefully still in the spirit of the original. It doesn't look like we'd
> ever reach consensus on any other name though.
> 
> *sigh* I guess I should invest in an anti-RSI keyboard.
> 
> - Steve
>