24 Feb
2013
24 Feb
'13
2:28 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Johannes Kroll <jkroll(a)lavabit.com> wrote:
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 19:47:26 -0500
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
You and David do not understand what I'm proposing. My intention is not
to create a new protocol. Creating another system because there are
already too many would be indeed idiotic: that's what has been done
before with the other session managers. I imagine creating *something*
that makes the existing systems work together, *without* changing the
clients that use the existing systems.
I.e. one app may be thinking it's talking to non-session, one app
speaks ladish, another thinks it's talking to jack-session, but in
reality they all talk to one session manager which implements all 3
(4... 7... umpteen) protocols.
I have not looked at the implementations of the existing systems. Maybe
what I'm proposing is not easily possible. In any case, I want you to
understand that I'm not proposing to increase the number of systems in
order to decrease the number of systems. That would be, indeed, dumb in
a painfully obvious way.
All of the existing session management protocols have inherent limitations
which I was attempting to avoid by creating NSM. Nedko and I have discussed
including NSM protocol support in LADISH, which would be kind of like what
you're talking about, but the problem remains that the whole would be a
lowest-common-denominator of functionality. Now, if jack session and LASH
and LADISH level 1 applications eventually fade out and move to the NSM
protocol, then maybe that's OK. But in the meantime it's not going to be as
functional as using pure NSM.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Johannes Kroll
<jkroll(a)lavabit.com>
wrote:
Could you elaborate please: why is compatibility between the existing
session management systems a dumb idea?
you don't compatibility between DECnet and BITNET. you don't get
compatibility between english and chinese. what you get is a *new*
system/protocol/language.
<ob-xkcd>
http://xkcd.com/927/
</ob-xkcd>