refactoring EngineController to depend directly on Phonon

[Mark Kretschmann]

On 3/17/08, Ian Monroe <ian at monroe.nu> wrote:
> What do people think about not using plugins at all for our audio
>  backend? I was actually arguing against this idea with Max K just a
>  couple of days ago. But then I looked at trying to fix some of the
>  issues with the phonon backend and noticed what a mess
>  EngineController is. I also noticed that not much calls
>  EngineController really (just its currentTrack method), so I don't
>  think it would be so painful.
>
>  Outside of EngineController (and perhaps supporting classes) we should
>  continue to have no Phonon includes, with the possible exception of
>  PhononNamespace which has Phonon's state system that would probably
>  make sense to switch too (no more rough conversions between different
>  state systems).

Makes sense. I was just thinking we could postpone this until after
2.0, since it's not really a crucial thing to do and we already have
so much on our plate.

-- 
Mark