16 Dec
2004
16 Dec
'04
1:46 p.m.
I think all his points were important for the LAD
community
to hear.
Christoph, you may like to send those points to the
Developer list as some developers don't subscribe to the
users list.
Oh, I really do not want to do so:
* I hate subscribing a list simply to mess it up with a
message and then leave again
* Of course I hope that some developers read my post here and
remember it at the right time; on the other hand, we're on
free software. This also means the freedom of any developer
who spends a lot of worthy time writing free software to do
what *he* (or her) wants to do
* I'd like to avoid a behaviour like »I'm the user and you
should do this or that for me«
The GUI programs should have that functionality IMO,
you
can always fiddle around as much as you want in
qjackconnect if you like. Having the functionality in a
program doesn't restrict you from using an external program
like qjackconnect.
Exactly what I feel. I do not think aconnect or qjackctl
should be replaced, but optionally put into the single
programs.
I think the Linux audio apps have come a long way and
I'd
be excited to see developers take the next step and make
their programs easier to use and more polished.
IMO anything that makes a program crash (like losing Jack
connectivity) is a bug, pure and simple. The program
should handle this gracefully, without question.
The developer decides what's more important, proper crash
handling, polished UI or new features. And I guess that even
users want better to have the new features than proper crash
handling or a better UI ;-) .
Anyway, I simply wanted to try to remember the user; sometimes
it is a pity that some software isn't used more because it is
too complicated for most users.
Best regards
ce