29 Mar
2012
29 Mar
'12
1:26 p.m.
2012/3/29 rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com>
On 03/29/2012 01:16 PM, thijs van severen wrote:
true, but currently we dont have any overview at all
any tool is better than no tool, right ?
follow me on my Audio & Linux blog <http://audio-and-linux.blogspot.com/> !
2012/3/29 rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@**gmail.com <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com>>>
On 03/29/2012 12:29 PM, thijs van severen wrote:
2012/3/29 Louigi Verona <louigi.verona(a)gmail.com
<mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.**com <louigi.verona(a)gmail.com>>
<mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.__**com <mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.**
com <louigi.verona(a)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(a)gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@**gmail.com<rosea.grammostola@gmail.com>
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@__gm**ail.com <http://gmail.com>
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@**gmail.com<rosea.grammostola@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 ?
A matrix is nice for a quick overview, but for such a decision you need
more in depth information and argumentation. A matrix could only function
as a tool to help with the decision.