20 Dec
2009
20 Dec
'09
8:13 a.m.
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:23:54AM +0100, rosea grammostola wrote:
Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote:
dunno... jack session is frozen now.
it took a huge flame war to find out some implications of the
requirements.
so basically i dont think we can reach consensus.
and sessionhandling is _only_ about consensus. its not a problem at all
to implement.
lad is dead.
When I'm not in group 1, I'm hanging out
in group 4.
Inter-host and headless session management is important to
me, too.
I really do hope that Fons releases his code. :-)
@Fons, thanks for your reply. It seems that you're not planned to make a
session handler for the mass... That's not bad at all in many cases.
Good luck with it and I hope you decide to release your code.
Ok, roughly we have 4 groups now (assuming that we can call >1
individuals a group ;) )
Group 1 has spoken, group 3 and group 4.
What can we expect from group 2? Maybe some of the lash developers
belongs in this group?
Dave, Juuso, Bob Ham, ... ? What are your plans now?
Regards,
\r
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
--
torben Hohn