schoappied at gmail.com
Wed Apr 9 05:41:52 EDT 2008
Bengt Gördén wrote:
> Den Wednesday 09 April 2008 04.45.50 skrev Nick Copeland:
>>>> So why is there so low interest in LASH?
>> That almost answers itself. Linux Audio does not exist in a vacuum. Most
>> applications respond to the demands of the users since the developers are
>> pushed along by necessity as much as their own interests. The demand for
>> LASH features has been pretty low on LAU, the one submit here and there
>> with a single response attest to that.
> Ok. Then it's best to speak up then.
> It could be because of several reasons. One might be that LAU people of today
> are fairly up to speed with system administration and used to fiddle around
> with lots of programs. But I think that when the audio distros gets more
> attention, that would result in more and more people that aren't that fluent
> in technical matters and that will eventually lead to demands like LASH. I
> believe that it also could be one of the factors that would make up for a
> good marketing point for audio under Linux.
> If there were LASH for qsynth, ardour, hydrogen, zynaddsubfx, muse and seq24 I
> would definitely use it. And yes. I know that 50% of them have LASH but I
> would like to see 100% :-)
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
I'm not a dev at all... I just like to see more applications which are
using LASH... a very welcome tool in a studio which can save a lot of
'configuration' and time...
I think the best way to make lash 'populair' is using it a lot and ask
the devs of your favourite app to make lash possible! And advice other
people to use it, cause I have the idea that not many people now about
the existence of LASH....
More information about the Linux-audio-user