[LAD] LADI

rosea grammostola rosea.grammostola at gmail.com
Tue Dec 22 17:23:54 UTC 2009


David Robillard wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 11:45 +0100, rosea grammostola wrote:
> [...]
>   
>> @Bob Ham, David Robillard and Juuso Alasuutari,
>>
>> Can you describe in your own words:
>>
>>
>> 1) What are the strong and weak points of LADI in your opinion and why?
>>
>> 2) What will be a good approach now for getting a Linux audio session 
>> handler in your opinion
>> (taking also LASH/LADI/Jack Session and Fons ideas in account)?
>>
>> 3) Are you willing to contribute to an solution and how do you see this 
>> (own project / collaboration with other projects etc.).
>>     
>
> Short and to the point, SIMPLE (to implement), low or no dependencies,
> actually existent, portable. 
@David, thanks for your reply.

"Portable to other platforms", can you explain why that is important for 
you?


>  Interface is by a very wide margin the
> most important thing.
>
> Which of the present approaches best meets these goals should be
> obvious; you tell me.  
It's sounds to me more like the 'jack session approach' then the 'LADI 
approach', right?

> I will probably end up creating something like the aforementioned header
> for use in plugins anyway, though.
Which workflow do you prefer?
One 'all-in-one-app' like Ardour with (LV2) plugins or the modular 
approach of connecting different jack applications to each other, or both?


Regards,

\r




More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list