On 11/22/2009 01:45 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
I think this is why Nedko has decided to draw a line here. He has
attempted to provide a very flexible and powerful implementation built
on top of several other implementations. The big problem is that
developer community is not getting on board.
If we gave more support to the LADI tools as a session management option
then we could get feedback on the capabilities of the toolset from the
wider community of users and get a better impression of how far from the
target we really are.
If jack1/2, qjackctl, patchage, gnome, kde, etc... don't get behind it
as a viable session management option then we will never fulfil the
Boost Hardware Ltd
Linux-audio-dev mailing list