5 Feb
2008
5 Feb
'08
2:46 p.m.
On Feb 5, 2008 4:56 PM, Bob Ham <rah(a)bash.sh> wrote:
That's precisely *NOT* the reason why me, and probably quite a few
others want to use <you_name_it> protocol to control jack.
If you want
'real' session management, you also want to save the jack-settings
per session.
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. From Fons :
Right. Then again, all we need is a
better control framework in
libjack and let people develop with whatever protocol they like, be it
OSC, D-Bus, a direct use of the API or smoke signals. I don't
understand why this disagreement goes on while a simple solution on
which everyone could agree has already been brought up.
__________________
Marc-Olivier Barre,
MarcO'Chapeau.
That being said, I still do favor D-Bus over OSC.
It's local only, no network support.