On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Paul Davis <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:paul@linuxaudiosystems.com">paul@linuxaudiosystems.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Iain Duncan &lt;<a href="mailto:iainduncanlists@gmail.com">iainduncanlists@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; Thanks, that clarifies things a lot for me. I didn&#39;t think about the disk<br>
&gt; seeking issue. (For my app, my intent is to have everything in RAM for live<br>
&gt; playing ). Was the intent of the jack looping transport proposal to allow<br>
&gt; clients to know that they were looping and do seamless looping too if they<br>
&gt; are able?<br>
<br>
</div>yes.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Off the official ardourd-jack roadmap record, do you think there&#39;s a realistic chance of this still happening in the next few years? At least for Ardour? I might code such that I can use ardour with it when available if that&#39;s in the works because that would be super cool, but I totally get that it may be a very low priority for Ardour dev.<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>iain</div>