Fwd: Re: aRts vs JACK

Neil Stevens neil at qualityassistant.com
Sat Feb 22 21:35:59 GMT 2003

Hash: SHA1

On Saturday February 22, 2003 01:19, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:
>    Hi!
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 10:12:24PM -0800, Neil Stevens wrote:
> > On Thursday February 20, 2003 12:50, Roger Larsson wrote:
> > > Did you actually READ my message before replying to it?
> >
> > Yet you don't:
> >
> > 1. List what you need
> > 2. List what you need that aRts doesn't do
> > 3. Propose one replacement
> > 4. Show that your replacment will supply everything that aRts does
> > provide
> >
> > So I see no evidence of useful action on your part.  Hence, you aren't
> > part of "we" yet.
> I see evidence of useful action on Rogers part. If not for anything
> else, I can praise him for discussing with me on the realtime watching
> daemon to make artswrapper safe. It didn't come to a conclusion, but he
> was the only guy who actually bothered to help out with code, when it
> came to that.
> But I think the discussion he triggered is useful, because we can use it
> to sort out some misunderstandings, and if things go right, in the end
> "we" (including Roger, and including you) will work towards a common
> goal, to get the outstanding issues fixed.

Sure.  But as I said later in the thread, I got the wrong impression from 
the original mail he sent to this list.

> > I'd rather not see the work of all these people, including myself,
> > discarded on a whim.  KDE 4 or not, the burden of proof on any
> > replacement will be on the proponents of the replacement, and it will
> > be a heavy burden.
> Still. The issue is grave. Anybody who is discussing on it now should be
> taken serious, and we should be honest on what is the current state,
> where we are now, and where we want to go.
> I think that aRts does a much better job for KDE3 than most people may
> have believed in the beginning, but still there are issues with it, and
> fixing some of these will need us to break backward compatibility.
> Sooner or later, this challenge must be faced, and its insufficient to
> always reiterate
>  - aRts is good
>  - aRts is useful
>  - aRts has a lot of work put into it

Sure it's sufficient.  Until someone proposes something better, aRts is 
what we have, and it does work.

If a different person wrote to kde-core-devel every other month saying KDE 
should drop Qt and use GTK, what do you think the reaction would be?

> While all of these may be true, we also need to ensure the quality of
> KDE4 and KDE5. To do this, we need to discuss the weaknesses we
> currently have.

No, we need to discuss the strengths as well as the weaknesses.  I've yet 
to see a proposal that maintains all of our current strengths.

> > You know how to use artsbuilder with kaboodle??? Could you tell me how
> > to do it?  Thanks!
> Kaboodle _should_ use the audio manager as any aRts application does,
> and not directly an Arts::Synth_BUS_UPLINK. Thus, its not *great* that
> you can not use kaboodle with artsbuilder, because kaboodle bypasses
> standard aRts mechanisms, but a serious bug. You should use an
> Arts::Synth_AMAN_PLAY object.
> I would be more than happy if you could fix this in the next version of
> KDE. But maybe I have not seen the higher purpose in why you don't use
> it. Then, please tell me why?

What, should I change this:

	d->playobj = factory.createPlayObject(d->file, true);

to something else?

Kaboodle has no high purposes in its arts code.  I started with Noatun, and 
it's gradually evolved into using libartskde.  I'd not hestiate to change 
if if I've made a mistake.  Just please tell me what I did wrong. :-)

- -- 
Neil Stevens - neil at qualityassistant.com
"Distinctions by race are so evil, so arbitrary and insidious that a
state bound to defend the equal protection of the laws must not allow
them in any public sphere." -- Thurgood Marshall
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the kde-multimedia mailing list