30 Jul
2012
30 Jul
'12
11:43 a.m.
On 07/30/2012 03:12 AM, James Morris wrote:
(1.0) Non Session Management support
Nice to see a dev who's taking this up. Session management a 'must have'
for jack standalone applications and imho NSM is the best option for this.
Best regards,
\r
1 Aug
1 Aug
3:32 a.m.
New subject: [LAU] [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85
On 30/07/12 "rosea.grammostola" <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 07/30/2012 03:12 AM, James Morris wrote:
Woohoo there is now a grand total of 5 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/nsm
Jack Session failed with 14 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/jack_session
LASH failed despite 26 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/all/lash
Just not enough developers with free time and brain cells not owned by
their employers to make it work.
James.
(1.0) Non Session Management support
Nice to see a dev who's taking this up. Session management a 'must
have' for jack standalone applications and imho NSM is the best option
for this.
1:50 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 08/01/2012 03:30 AM, James Morris wrote:
On 30/07/12
"rosea.grammostola"<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I count 7, but yeah despite your sarcasm, that's good news indeed,
that's already more support then LASH had in it's first days.
But the nice and essential thing about NSM is that it's support apps
without a state, and apps without NSM support via nsm-proxy.
Moreover NSM-proxy supports Ladish level 1 also.
On 07/30/2012 03:12 AM, James Morris wrote:
Woohoo there is now a grand total of 5 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/nsm (1.0) Non Session Management support
Nice to see a dev who's taking this up. Session management a 'must
have' for jack standalone applications and imho NSM is the best option
for this.
LASH failed despite 26 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/all/lash
The problem with LASH is that it has obvious (technical) flaws. Session
managers today are much better. Imo NSM has a great technical design,
with advantages compared to other session api's and without (essential)
technical flaws.
If you think that all the apps apps.linuxaudio.org will support a
session api, then you're not very realistic. That's why it's essential
that NSM support apps without NSM support and apps without a state in a
user friendly way.
Just not enough developers with free time and brain cells not owned by
their employers to make it work.
That's not totally true. If you count all the apps with a form of
session management support, you can't really blame their efforts. On the
other hand, it's true: session management seems to be primarily a users
problem not a developers problem, unfortunately.
It's kind of a pity that NSM was released not earlier. Because of other
session api's, devs are hesitated to add NSM support, but I'm confident
that this will change soon.
Speaking for myself, I start *all* the linuxaudio applications I use
(with NSM support or via NSM-proxy) in NSM, because it works. And that's
why I am optimistic, it's just great that all those years we have
something that just works! :)
Best regards,
\r
1:23 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 01/08/12 "rosea.grammostola" <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That many apps already have a form of session management is one of the
problems for NSM. What should a developer do when attempting to support
NSM in an application which already has Jack Session support and LASH
support? It increases the complexity of what the user interface has to
deal with.
On 08/01/2012 03:30 AM, James Morris wrote:
I guess. But for those who need to play around with stuff before they
find what they can use to start being productive it's not good.
On 30/07/12
"rosea.grammostola"<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I count 7, but yeah despite your sarcasm, that's good news indeed,
that's already more support then LASH had in it's first days.
But the nice and essential thing about NSM is that it's support apps
without a state, and apps without NSM support via nsm-proxy.
Moreover NSM-proxy supports Ladish level 1 also.
On 07/30/2012 03:12 AM, James Morris wrote:
Woohoo there is now a grand total of 5 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/nsm (1.0) Non Session Management support
Nice to see a dev who's taking this up. Session management a 'must
have' for jack standalone applications and imho NSM is the best
option for this.
LASH failed despite 26 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/all/lash
The problem with LASH is that it has obvious (technical) flaws.
Session managers today are much better. Imo NSM has a great technical
design, with advantages compared to other session api's and without
(essential) technical flaws.
If you think that all the apps apps.linuxaudio.org will support a
session api, then you're not very realistic. That's why it's
essential that NSM support apps without NSM support and apps without a
state in a user friendly way.
Just not enough developers with free time and brain cells not owned
by their employers to make it work.
That's not totally true. If you count all the apps with a form of
session management support, you can't really blame their efforts. On
the other hand, it's true: session management seems to be primarily a
users problem not a developers problem, unfortunately. It's kind of a pity that NSM was released not
earlier. Because of
other session api's, devs are hesitated to add NSM support, but I'm
confident that this will change soon.
Maybe it's actually better - at least most people are aware now of the
problems with the other session managers (although from my experience
with LASH the main problems I faced were persistent crashes before ever
figuring out how to use it and way before any awareness of it's design
problems).
In Petri-Foo it wasn't so much of a problem. I simply removed support
for LASH because there was no user base to tell me otherwise. But can I
do that with other apps?
I'm looking at jack-rack for instance.
Speaking for myself, I start *all* the linuxaudio applications I use
(with NSM support or via NSM-proxy) in NSM, because it works. And
that's why I am optimistic, it's just great that all those years we
have something that just works! :)
Best regards,
\r
1:19 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 08/01/2012 11:53 AM, James Morris wrote:
On 01/08/12
"rosea.grammostola"<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't see what you mean. You've a list of apps with NSM support. You
can use those in the NSM session. Other apps you can launch via
nsm-proxy. If you want to use Ladish l1, look at the list of apps with
ladish l1 support.
No session manager, that's a problem. Users play around with stuff and
never become productive. Standalone Jack applications are nice, but
without good session support modular linuxaudio is a joke to say it frankly.
On 08/01/2012 03:30 AM, James Morris wrote:
I guess. But for those who need to play around with stuff before they
find what they can use to start being productive it's not good. On 30/07/12
"rosea.grammostola"<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I count 7, but yeah despite your sarcasm, that's good news indeed,
that's already more support then LASH had in it's first days.
But the nice and essential thing about NSM is that it's support apps
without a state, and apps without NSM support via nsm-proxy.
Moreover NSM-proxy supports Ladish level 1 also.
On 07/30/2012 03:12 AM, James Morris wrote:
> (1.0) Non Session Management support
Nice to see a dev who's taking this up. Session management a 'must
have' for jack standalone applications and imho NSM is the best
option for this.
Woohoo there is now a grand total of 5 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/categories/nsm
LASH failed despite 26 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/all/lash
The problem with LASH is that it has obvious (technical) flaws.
Session managers today are much better. Imo NSM has a great technical
design, with advantages compared to other session api's and without
(essential) technical flaws.
If you think that all the apps apps.linuxaudio.org will support a
session api, then you're not very realistic. That's why it's
essential that NSM support apps without NSM support and apps without a
state in a user friendly way.
That many apps already have a form of session management is one of the
problems for NSM. What should a developer do when attempting to support
NSM in an application which already has Jack Session support and LASH
support? It increases the complexity of what the user interface has to
deal with.
First, it makes it far more easy to implement NSM. The time consuming
'search work' for adding session support is already done.
Second, I assume that it is possible to support more session api's in
one application.
Maybe it's actually better - at least most people are aware now of the
problems with the other session managers
In Petri-Foo it wasn't so much of a problem. I simply removed support
for LASH because there was no user base to tell me otherwise. But can I
do that with other apps?
I'm looking at jack-rack for instance.
See above.
Regards,
\r
1:19 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 01/08/12 "rosea.grammostola" <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I guess. But for those who need to play around with stuff before they
find what they can use to start being productive it's not good.
I don't see what you mean. You've a list of apps with NSM support. You
can use those in the NSM session. Other apps you can launch via
nsm-proxy. If you want to use Ladish l1, look at the list of apps with
ladish l1 support.
I would but linuxaudio.org seems to have gone down :-(
On 08/01/2012 11:53 AM, James Morris wrote:
..
LASH failed
despite 26 apps supporting it:
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/all/lash
The problem with LASH is that it has obvious (technical) flaws.
Session managers today are much better. Imo NSM has a great
technical design, with advantages compared to other session api's
and without (essential) technical flaws.
If you think that all the apps apps.linuxaudio.org will support a
session api, then you're not very realistic. That's why it's
essential that NSM support apps without NSM support and apps
without a state in a user friendly way. That many apps
already have a form of session management is one of
the problems for NSM. What should a developer do when attempting to
support NSM in an application which already has Jack Session support
and LASH support? It increases the complexity of what the user
interface has to deal with.
First, it makes it far more easy to implement NSM. The time consuming
'search work' for adding session support is already done.
Second, I assume that it is possible to support more session api's in
one application.
The point I was making is supporting multiple session handlers makes
the application more complex than it necessarily needs to be and
increases the amount of code that needs to be maintained.
If LASH has so many faults and nobody is maintaining LASH itself, by
dropping support for LASH in clients we kill two birds with one
stone: 1) there's less maintenence work for devs to do - always good
and 2) it directs users to better solutions such as NSM.
But I don't actually know what user base exists for LASH. I want to
drop support for it but will revolting users castrate me for it?
1:32 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 08/01/2012 12:41 PM, James Morris wrote:
On 01/08/12
"rosea.grammostola"<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't see what you mean. You've a list of apps with NSM support. You
can use those in the NSM session. Other apps you can launch via
nsm-proxy. If you want to use Ladish l1, look at the list of apps with
ladish l1 support.
I would but linuxaudio.org seems to have gone down :-(
LASH is dead, period. The only reason not to remove LASH is that Ladish
supports it. But because Ladish will support NSM in future, it might be
no problem to completely remove LASH if you add NSM.
JackSession is also more or less dead, because of some flaws in
practical usage and because of the fact that it is more or less no
longer maintained any longer. Which is good imo, it's better to have one
session api then a lot. Ladish supports JS, but other then that there is
little reason for not replacing JS with NSM.
It might be good for Linuxaudio if the JackSession devs declare
JackSession to be dead.
Regards,
\r
On 08/01/2012 11:53 AM, James Morris wrote:
..
> LASH failed despite 26 apps supporting it:
> http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/all/lash
The problem with LASH is that it has obvious (technical) flaws.
Session managers today are much better. Imo NSM has a great
technical design, with advantages compared to other session api's
and without (essential) technical flaws.
If you think that all the apps apps.linuxaudio.org will support a
session api, then you're not very realistic. That's why it's
essential that NSM support apps without NSM support and apps
without a state in a user friendly way.
I guess. But for those who need to play around with stuff before they
find what they can use to start being productive it's not good. That many
apps already have a form of session management is one of
the problems for NSM. What should a developer do when attempting to
support NSM in an application which already has Jack Session support
and LASH support? It increases the complexity of what the user
interface has to deal with.
First, it makes it far more easy to implement NSM. The time consuming
'search work' for adding session support is already done.
Second, I assume that it is possible to support more session api's in
one application.
The point I was making is supporting multiple session handlers makes
the application more complex than it necessarily needs to be and
increases the amount of code that needs to be maintained.
If LASH has so many faults and nobody is maintaining LASH itself, by
dropping support for LASH in clients we kill two birds with one
stone: 1) there's less maintenence work for devs to do - always good
and 2) it directs users to better solutions such as NSM.
But I don't actually know what user base exists for LASH. I want to
drop support for it but will revolting users castrate me for it?
1:52 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
Is JACKSession really dead?
And fellas, to a non-coder, can you explain why isn't session handling done
through JACK, which seems like a logical thing to do?
L.V.
2 Aug
2 Aug
11:44 a.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 08/01/2012 01:52 PM, Louigi Verona wrote:
Is JACKSession really dead?
And fellas, to a non-coder, can you explain why isn't session handling
done through JACK, which seems like a logical thing to do?
I'm not a coder.
Advantages are imo:
1) you can leave JACK apps outside a session on purpose
This is useful for instance when you have JACK apps running all the time
in your studio, switching sessions shouldn't force you to stop that
application.
2) crashing JACK doesn't corrupt your session probably
3) it works also with other audio servers like KLANG :)
Regards,
\r
3:17 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:43 AM, rosea.grammostola <
rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
3) it works also with other audio servers like KLANG :)
i imagine that this is supposed to be facetious, but if you had understood
anything about KLANG it should have been that it is NOT intended to be, or
involve, a server.
3:40 p.m.
New subject: [ann] out now petri-foo 0.1.85 / NSM
On 08/02/2012 03:17 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:43 AM, rosea.grammostola
<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com <mailto:rosea.grammostola@gmail.com>> wrote:
3) it works also with other audio servers like KLANG :)
i imagine that this is supposed to be facetious, but if you had
understood anything about KLANG it should have been that it is NOT
intended to be, or involve, a server.
Yes it is a joke. My comment (and KLANG probably too).
But there is some truth in it too I think. NSM doesn't depend on JACK,
so it works with JACK1, JACK2 and with a hypothetical other audio
lowlatency system.
Regards,
\r
4313
days inactive
4316
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
10 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
James Morris -
Louigi Verona -
Paul Davis -
rosea.grammostola