On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Craig Brashear <[email protected]> wrote: > I am still not convinced that the timing of this swap to pulseaudio is > in Kubuntus best interest. Due to the radical changes going on > in the KDE upstream in their switch to a Qt base, and the changes > going on the library structure, it makes bug > chasing that much more difficult, akin to finding > one individual bee in a swarm.
Eh, we've gone through this before with GNOME. It's no worse or better, just more of the same, although this time around it'll be less of a hassle given there are three times as many people (i.e., 3) working on its infrastructure in Ubuntu. Also, there is no "right" time to introduce a fairly significant infrastructure change. On the other hand, we certainly don't want to do so during an LTS. > As iterated before, I have nothing against pulse, it works > exceptionally well in GNOME, that is why they have a GNOME > base for Ubuntustudio, not a Kubuntu studio. No, that is not why we (yes, I was part of forming that derivative, too, along with Xubuntu) chose to base Ubuntu Studio on GNOME. Originally we debated (upon pulse's introduction into the desktop) whether to try and remove the pulse dependency but ultimately decided that we could document and use pasuspender for the cases that really couldn't work alongside pulse. The only reason there is no shipped Kubuntu base for Studio is because no one has expressed interest *and* stepped up to spin an image. Best, -Dan -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
