MAS in KDE

[Neil Stevens]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday March 05, 2003 12:25, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:
>    Hi!
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 12:02:46AM -0800, Neil Stevens wrote:
> > On Tuesday March 04, 2003 11:49, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 04:12:15PM -0800, Neil Stevens wrote:
> > > > We already know we are going to choose a system.  We will already
> > > > have to wrap it.  CSL gives us nothing beyond that.
> > >
> > > And preferably I am working on choosing an open, interoperable
> > > solution for sound input/output in KDE3.2 ; CSL was just a
> > > suggestion I made, and PortAudio might be an even better suggestion.
> > >
> > > Isn't that choosing a system? I think we should not try to choose a
> > > complete media framework (such as GStreamer) and try to solve
> > > everything with it.
> >
> > But there already demonstrated needs for a complete framework
> > throughout KDE and kdemultimedia.  I need video in Kaboodle.  Charles
> > Samuels filters and the equalizer in Noatun.  Benjamin Meyer needs
> > audio compression in KAudioCreator.
> >
> > Going with some featureless sound server will not meet these needs. 
> > Even if we use one of them, we still have to put one of those
> > frameworks on top of it.
>
> So whats the problem of doing this? 

It adds another dependency, another hassle.  Make PortAudio another driver.  
Don't make KDE depend on it.

They don't even keep binary compatibility!

> > > If we need something (like: input/output of sound streams), we
> > > should choose something that fills this need, or implement something
> > > that does. I have identified a need for input/output of sound
> > > streams (see CSL paper), and I am trying to choose something that
> > > fills this need for KDE.
> > >
> > > If I am doing something that makes no sense to you, let me know. ;)
> >
> > You're making sense to me just fine.  I just wish you could see that
> > KDE needs more than just basic input and output of sound streams.
>
> You probably don't mean that I don't see it (for had I not seen it, I
> probably would not have written aRts in the first place), but that I
> don't take this into account in the right way.

Yes, you wrote aRts, but you seem to go out of your way to criticize aRts 
these days, and you keep proposing we use less featureful things (CSL, 
PortAudio).

> Thus I'd like to know what would be the right thing to do, instead of a
> reason why you think I am doing the wrong thing (supposedly: blindness
> for the obvious facts). What are the obvious things I am missing that
> make depending on PortAudio in KDE3.2 a problem (while keeping aRts
> around as it has always been)?

Binary compatibility breakage from release to release.

More installation trouble.

Portability trouble.  aRts has been worked on for our platforms.  With 
PortAudio we have to start all over.

- -- 
Neil Stevens - neil at qualityassistant.com
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will
look upon the act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."
 -- Gandhi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+ZpPCf7mnligQOmERAoXyAJ4mvuGb8j8/5HPk8oGAJMGyhw65qgCgkKmn
8CgGOaVuoLjbLqs1Eih5HF4=
=xwN4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----