[LAD] Summercode 2008: LASH as a D-Bus service
Bob Ham
rah at bash.sh
Thu Jan 24 11:09:55 UTC 2008
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 10:25 +0000, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
> Bob Ham wrote:
>
> > Of course it needs to handle it. It needs to cleanly shut down due to
> > the catastrophic failure.
>
> You'd want that during live performance? :)
No. But I wouldn't try to automate dealing with it, unless it happened
a lot. But then, if it happened a lot, I'd fix the bug instead.
> In a debug version, it could be desirable, but for "production" use
> (sorry for webspeak) it is unacceptable. It should be as fault-tolerant
> as possible in those situations.
Yes, you're right, JACK should be as fault tolerant as possible :-)
> > I think it's important *to* break the current API due to its many
> > issues. Why do you think that backwards compatibility with the current
> > API is important?
>
> LASH adoption was slow enough to start with. Several projects exist that
> use current LASH, some are quite useful (Hydrogen, Specimen), do you
> want to personally update each and every of those
The issue here is the advancement of Linux Audio in general. Changing
APIs is a short-term issue. IMHO, the long-term benefits of a better
engineered API far outweigh the short-term costs of breaking
compatibility.
Not only that, but the number of applications that support the current
API is very small. And I would indeed personally update the
applications I use. I did it before, LADCCAifying various applications,
from scratch. You may recall that a set of patches were included in
LADCCA releases.
If people wanted to use the current API, they can carry on doing so.
There's no reason they have to update to a newer API; nobody is going to
go into lash-0.5.4.tar.gz on nongnu.org and change the files in it.
Bob
--
Bob Ham <rah at bash.sh>
More information about the Linux-audio-dev
mailing list