On 03/29/2012 01:16 PM, thijs van severen wrote:

2012/3/29 rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola@gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@gmail.com>>

   On 03/29/2012 12:29 PM, thijs van severen wrote:



       2012/3/29 Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@gmail.com
       <mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.com>

       <mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.__com <mailto:louigi.verona@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@gmail.com
       <mailto:rosea.grammostola@gmail.com>

       <mailto:rosea.grammostola@__gmail.com

       <mailto: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.