4 Feb
2008
4 Feb
'08
11:17 a.m.
Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> writes:
I fail the see the advantage of D-Bus over e.g. OSC
via UDP or TCP.
Last time I looked at the lash sources, the protocol was really
just one small step away from OSC - it would have taken an hour
or two to do the conversion.
The advantage is D-Bus autolaunching of the "server" and better
integration with "desktop".
Other consideration: any form of session management
for the
systems I'm using would have to be at least a two-layer affair.
There is a first layer of 'system' apss talking to jack and
creating a working environment - this is all monitoring and
rendering stuff.
The second level is user sessions, also consisting of several
apps talking to jack. They *use* this existing environment but
should not be allowed to modify it.
For anything like lash to be useful here it would need to support
this layering.
This will be hard without proper integration with a desktop (window
manager) session handler. Something very similar can be achieved using
the "import subsessions" feature that I proposed earlier. I.e. have
system session [auto]loaded and then import (without replace) of user
session[s].
--
Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>