29 Mar
2012
29 Mar
'12
12:29 p.m.
2012/3/29 Louigi Verona <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> wrote:
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
follow me on my Audio & Linux blog <http://audio-and-linux.blogspot.com/> !
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