[LAD] making sense of Jack MIDI; or, is this an appropriate use for Jack?

[Paul Davis]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas <
pedro.lopez.cabanillas at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
>
> I'm hated among Jack MIDI zealots in these lists,
>

 [ ... ]


>
>
> Jack MIDI looks like it had been conceived with the goal that Ardour
> become the one and only sequencer application,
>

nobody hates you, but it is irritating that you would say stuff like this.
the history of JACK MIDI has very very little to do with Ardour, and indeed
was conceived long before any work had even been discussed that would make
Ardour a MIDI sequencer. not only that, but the guy who implemented most of
JACK MIDI went on to work for a competing DAW company!


> and everybody else should write plugins for it. That perhaps would make
> sense as a bussiness model, and if you want to write a MIDI Synth or some
> MIDI realtime app complementary to Ardour, Jack MIDI makes certainly more
> sense than anything else.
>

so ... no, the goal was to allow the ecosystem of JACK clients to exchange
MIDI data with (a) zero copy (b) sample accurate timing (c) correct thread
semantics for synthesis.

i have no idea why you find it necessary to disparage JACK MIDI in the way
that you have done above. i think there are many perfectly sound arguments
against JACK MIDI (they are almost symmetrically matched with arguments
against the ALSA sequencer), but the "JACK MIDI was conceived so that
Ardour would the rule the world" is silly and insulting.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/attachments/20130215/5509966d/attachment.html>