[LAU] VC and jack

Fons Adriaensen fons at linuxaudio.org
Sun Sep 25 20:41:21 UTC 2011

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 03:45:31PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:

> hint: the patch to add a new port type to JACK will involve on the
> same order of magnitude number of characters as have already been used
> in this email thread.

Indeed. But why should anyone submit a patch for an idea that
has already been rejected, in particular if the rejection was
motivated in a way that implicitly condones crappy programming
instead of criticizing it ? What sort of excellence can you
expect if things are decided in that way ? (1)

Don't take this personally, but I've had enough of this sort 
of negative argumentation for some time. I do remember the LV2
discussions (2), the Jack session ones, and some others. And
the result is that I go my own way, even if that leads to a
loss of synergy and benefit for all.

(1) Mediocrity.
(2) The real gem in that case was a remark that representing
the sample rate as a ratio would lead to inefficiency as it
required a (1, one) division.



More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list