[LAD] Non Session Management

[thijs van severen]

2012/3/29 rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola at gmail.com>

> On 03/29/2012 12:29 PM, thijs van severen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 2012/3/29 Louigi Verona <louigi.verona at gmail.com
>> <mailto:louigi.verona at gmail.**com <louigi.verona at gmail.com>>>
>>
>>
>>    my 2 cents from user perspective: I know where I save my files, I know
>>    where my sample collections are. i know that if i delete my sample
>>    collection, sessions won't load. i don't need any program to tell me
>>    that.
>>
>>    in fact, in using FL Studio or Cubase or LMMS you have the same
>>    situation. a project can use same files as another project and if you
>>    damage those files - well, sorry.
>>
>>    I do not see any reason for complications in session manager design. i
>>    agree with david, all of this is unnecessary and only will make NSM a
>>    session manager developers would be reluctant to adopt.
>>
>>    louigi verona.
>>
>>    On 3/29/12, rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola at gmail.com
>>    <mailto:rosea.grammostola@**gmail.com <rosea.grammostola at gmail.com>>>
>> wrote:
>>     > On 03/24/2012 11:09 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>>     >
>>     >>
>>     >> 3. Clearly defining the way an app should behave w.r.t. its
>>     >>     File menu entries (when managed). This is quite intrusive
>>     >>     to existing clients, but it is IMHO absolutley essential.
>>     >>     Kudos to the designer(s) for the having the courage to do
>>     >>     this instead of allowing application developers to take
>>     >>     the 'least effort' way (which would of course be better
>>     >>     marketing, but invite later misery).
>>     >
>>     > How easy or how difficult is it compared to JackSession for
>>    example, to
>>     > add NSM support to an application?
>>     >
>>     > Is it possible to have NSM and JackSession support in one
>>    application?
>>     >
>>     > Regards,
>>     >
>>     > \r
>>
>>
>>
>> wasnt there a link somewhere in this mail thread about a comparison of
>> all the pros and cons of 'all' SM's ?
>> i went trough the thread but could not find it  :-(
>> ah well, maybe i'm just dreaming
>> would be nice though, such a comparison matrix
>>
>>  Iirc it was just an idea to do make that. It doesn't exist yet.
>
> An overview would be good imo. It would be even better if such a matrix
> could help in making a decision for the best SM API to support, at the
> moment. As a user who wants to use session API X, I don't have much
> benefits if applications supports session API Y. Unless I decide to use
> Ladish, personally that wouldn't be my choice though.
>
>
IMHO making such a matrix is the only good way to make a decisions of any
kind
is there anyone that has already made a 'study' that could be used as the
basis of a comparison matrix ?
thijs


-- 

follow me on my Audio & Linux blog <http://audio-and-linux.blogspot.com/> !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/attachments/20120329/69143d00/attachment.html>