On Mon, 2020-11-23 at 18:20 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 06:01:18PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On 11/20/20 5:26 PM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > > The pulseaudio package will be uninstalled and pipewire-pulse will be > > > installed. > > > > > > pipewire-pulse does not yet implement all the features of pulseaudio > > > but it is expected that > > > comparable functionality will be implemented later. Most notable > > > features that are likely > > > not going to be available for fedora 34 > > IMO, this alone disqualifies this plan. > > > > Fedora should be a stable end-user distro and not a testing site for eager > > devs to test their immature and incomplete works. > > I think Fedora should establish strong "no regressions" rule when > replacing system software like this. PulseAudio has had 15 years of > development, features and fixes. It is hard to believe pipewire is as > capable as a replacement now.
I disagree. This would be incompatible with the "First" foundation. If we'd had a "no regressions" rule for pre-PA audio, we'd probably never have landed PA, or not for years. Are things on the whole better since we did? I'd say yes. Will our first release with pipewire probably have some bugs that constitute regressions from the previous audio setup? Almost certainly. Especially given the sheer amounts of stuff people do - see your config below - I think we'd find it difficult to have a "no regressions" rule and still be Fedora. Part of Fedora's job is to adopt new things and shake some of the initial bugs out of them. > Of course we would need to start with collecting the use cases, and > this will be different for every user. For example, I frequently use my > laptop with 3 sound devices present: built-in speakers, speakers > connected to USB-C dock and bluetooth headphones*. I use pavucontrol to > route applications to proper output/input and I expect this to work the > same with PW. This is important to me. Did that all work with the first Fedora with PA in it? I bet not. Would we have as capable a PA today if Fedora hadn't taken the leap to include PA? Probably not. > On the other hand, I do not use AC3 passthrough when watching movies > and I'm not so much interested in power saving through dynamic > latency/timers adjustment and suspending outputs. If this ceased to > work, _I_ wouldn't notice. But for someone this may be crucial. The > same for equalizer modules. Or volume ramp up. Or multiple device > combining. And so on. Yes, and on and on and on and on and on and on and on... > Right now "How to test" section of Change Proposal contains only very > rudimentary cases like "check if rhythmbox plays". This is not enough > when replacing as potent software as PulseAudio. *This*, though, I tend to agree with. "How to test" sections do tend to be mailed in. It would be good to cover at least a range of commonly used configurations here. QA folks, this is definitely a Change that (if approved) we should do a Test Day (or several) for, and probably one that could use help with a better test plan. Do we have any domain experts who'd like to volunteer to work on that? Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
