5 Feb
2008
5 Feb
'08
12:04 p.m.
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 09:32 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:
Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 schrieb Bob Ham:
> On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 18:18 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:
> > Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> > > 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
> Why is freeing LASH from being a libjack client a goal?
as more and more users have not only one session per
computer but both
multiple sessions per computer and multiple computers per session, that is
another reason to part lash from jack-as-a-dependency
Why is LASH being a JACK client a problem if there are multiple
sessions? Similarly, why is LASH being a JACK client a problem if there
are multiple hosts?
Bob
--
Bob Ham <rah(a)bash.sh>