Subject: Re: [LAD] Summercode 2008: LASH, pt. 3

From: Bob Ham <rah@...> · Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2008 - 4:04 pm

On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 09:32 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:

quoted text> Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 schrieb Bob Ham:

> > On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 18:18 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote:

> > > Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> > > > I fail the see the advantage of D-Bus over e.g. OSC via UDP or TCP.

> > > The core issue is abstracting the interfaces involved. As long as it

> > > serves to free LASH from being a libjack client

> > Why is freeing LASH from being a libjack client a goal?
> as more and more users have not only one session per computer but both

quoted text> multiple sessions per computer and multiple computers per session, that is

> another reason to part lash from jack-as-a-dependency
Why is LASH being a JACK client a problem if there are multiple

sessions?  Similarly, why is LASH being a JACK client a problem if there

are multiple hosts?
Bob
--

Bob Ham 
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-dev mailing list

Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev