« Return to Thread: DBus server control : description of 2 proposals

Re: DBus server control : description of 2 proposals

by Rui Nuno Capela :: Rate this Message:

On Fri, July 3, 2009 08:48, Stéphane Letz wrote:

> Some more remarks about the global issue:
>
>
> - as Patrick said, the JACK DBus package is probably to "win" in the
> near future. Why? because it (also) practically solves the issue with
> PulseAudio interaction (something new compared to what was the reason
> of this whole JACK DBus discussion at the first place) but we have to keep
> that in mind. Thus if we go for the Nedko proposal with the "jackdbus"
> incarnation of JACK server, then is does mean that "jackd" incarnation of
> JAKC server will (practically) be dropped. It does mean
> also that Qjacktl cannot be reliably be used anymore in this new scheme,
> (only if Rui accepts to DBusify it..).

yep i could do it... problem is that it will most certainly fail any
time-to-market deadline, i repeat *any* -- uber-procrastinator dixit :)

ok, any dbus-ified version of qjackctl is better off being a complete
brand new application. a brand new project that is. unfortunately, i'm not
seeing that happen anytime soon under my radar, sorry to tell.

however, it is my understanding that the possible hole left from a lack of
qjackctl on Nedko's jackdbus encarnation (1st prop) is filled up with the
ladi tools or whatever they are.

uber-procrastinator says: the 2nd prop is the one which seems the better
way to go ;)

it is important, at least from my pov, that starting the jackd server in
the so called legacy way of settings (eg. jackd -R -d alsa -dhw:1 -p128
-n3 ...) is to be kept always honored, independent of what control/config
api implementation. with time it may become deprecated and ultimately
convicted. time and genetics will tell the fate of jackd usage :)

> People that absolutely want to keep the "old" way (that is "jackd"
> incarnation + Qjackctl..;) will have to hope the packagers keeps
> preparing the "legacy" package... It does also mean ./~jackdrc will be
> dropped and the XML file model will stay, if we not go for a " JACK has
> to keep a centralized view of it's state" AKA "libconfig" idea or
> equivalent.
>

all that shall happen, eventually, not abruptly. i guess.

cheers
--
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc@...

_______________________________________________
Jack-Devel mailing list
Jack-Devel@...
http://lists.jackaudio.org/listinfo.cgi/jack-devel-jackaudio.org

« Return to Thread: DBus server control : description of 2 proposals