I'll throw in my 2 Euro cents.
If the VideoJACK crowd feels that JACK2 development is taking too
slow and decide to continue with their fork, may I suggest that we
all still discuss and draft a proper video API together? If a fork
happens out of practical reasons, it would be best to make sure
that switching video software to use JACK2 later on will be as
painless as possible.
Technical issues aside, I wish that those affiliated with VideoJACK
do not feel that their needs are neglected by the JACK developers.
I hope that the recent discussion has proved that people in this
camp are willing to improve JACK in this respect. Perhaps we could
move on and try to find more common ground?
Juuso
Yes sure.
Where is the latest state of the video patch for jack? I can have a
look and see how easy/difficult it would be to implement that in a
jackdmp/jack2 branch.
Stephane
It seems like porting the "video patch" to jackdmp/jack2 code base in
a video branch should be quite easy. I can start working on that, if
you think this is appropriate.
Stephane