On Sat, 2009-12-19 at 21:15 +0100, rosea grammostola wrote:
> 1) The 'one app with plugins' group.
> 2) The people who likes to work with different, small Jack applications
> 3) Group 3 is the same as group 2, BUT they have chosen dbus as
As Fons noted, there is a fourth group of people who are interested in
network-wide audio session handling, for various purposes. This is
actually the most important group as far as I'm concerned because their
goals are a superset of the second and third groups' goals.
> We can expect that group 3 will build a session handler for us. LADI is
> Now I'm wondering, what can we expect from group 2?
>From group 2 and 4, you can probably expect something.
I have designs for an OSC-based system, JIZZ, that has been mentioned as
the successor to LASH. It exists quite clearly in my mind. I've also
made some designs on paper and put them here:
Unfortunately, I don't have the time to refine the design, produce a
protocol and implement it. I'm currently working toward an MSc degree.
It's possible that I may continue work on JIZZ at some point in the
foreseeable future after completing my MSc. It's also possible that I
may work toward a PhD, in which case it's unlikely I'll have time to
work on JIZZ, at least within a useful time frame.
However, Florian Faber recently communicated with me privately based on
this thread and seemed to have similar ideas to mine. Particularly,
using OSC over TCP and mDNS for service advertisements. From that
communication, it also seemed as though Florian might have the time and
energy to produce something. I don't know what will come of that
Fons also has similar ideas (or did in the past.) Particularly, about
using OSC and also about focusing on the protocol rather than the
implementation. Fons has already commented on his own activity.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list