5 Feb
2008
5 Feb
'08
11:56 a.m.
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 09:32 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:
Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 schrieb Bob Ham:
This was addressed elsewhere. The issue is the dynamicity of JACK.
Rewriting LASH to use D-Bus because you don't want to fix JACK is
lunacy.
Bob
--
Bob Ham <rah(a)bash.sh>
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 18:18 +0200, Juuso
Alasuutari wrote:
If you want 'real' session management, you also want to save the jack-settings
per session. Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Why is freeing LASH from being a
libjack client a goal? I fail the see the advantage of D-Bus over e.g.
OSC via UDP or TCP.
The core issue is abstracting the interfaces involved. As long
as it
serves to free LASH from being a libjack client