On 03/29/2012 01:25 PM, thijs van severen wrote:
2012/3/29 rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammost...@gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammost...@gmail.com>>
On 03/29/2012 01:16 PM, thijs van severen wrote:
2012/3/29 rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammost...@gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammost...@gmail.com>
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@__gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammost...@gmail.com>>>
On 03/29/2012 12:29 PM, thijs van severen wrote:
2012/3/29 Louigi Verona <louigi.ver...@gmail.com
<mailto:louigi.ver...@gmail.com>
<mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.__com <mailto:louigi.ver...@gmail.com>>
<mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.
<mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.>____com
<mailto:louigi.verona@gmail.__com
<mailto:louigi.ver...@gmail.com>>>>
my 2 cents from user perspective: I know where I save my
files, I know
where my sample collections are. i know that if i
delete my
sample
collection, sessions won't load. i don't need any
program to
tell me
that.
in fact, in using FL Studio or Cubase or LMMS you
have the same
situation. a project can use same files as another
project
and if you
damage those files - well, sorry.
I do not see any reason for complications in session
manager
design. i
agree with david, all of this is unnecessary and
only will
make NSM a
session manager developers would be reluctant to adopt.
louigi verona.
On 3/29/12, rosea.grammostola
<rosea.grammost...@gmail.com <mailto:rosea.grammost...@gmail.com>
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@__gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammost...@gmail.com>>
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@>__gm__ail.com <http://gmail.com>
<mailto:rosea.grammostola@__gmail.com
<mailto:rosea.grammost...@gmail.com>>>> wrote:
> On 03/24/2012 11:09 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>
>>
>> 3. Clearly defining the way an app should behave w.r.t. its
>> File menu entries (when managed). This is quite intrusive
>> to existing clients, but it is IMHO absolutley essential.
>> Kudos to the designer(s) for the having the courage to do
>> this instead of allowing application developers to take
>> the 'least effort' way (which would of course be better
>> marketing, but invite later misery).
>
> How easy or how difficult is it compared to JackSession for
example, to
> add NSM support to an application?
>
> Is it possible to have NSM and JackSession support in one
application?
>
> Regards,
>
> \r
wasnt there a link somewhere in this mail thread about a
comparison of
all the pros and cons of 'all' SM's ?
i went trough the thread but could not find it :-(
ah well, maybe i'm just dreaming
would be nice though, such a comparison matrix
Iirc it was just an idea to do make that. It doesn't exist yet.
An overview would be good imo. It would be even better if such a
matrix could help in making a decision for the best SM API to
support, at the moment. As a user who wants to use session
API X, I
don't have much benefits if applications supports session API Y.
Unless I decide to use Ladish, personally that wouldn't be
my choice
though.
IMHO making such a matrix is the only good way to make a
decisions of
any kind
is there anyone that has already made a 'study' that could be
used as
the basis of a comparison matrix ?
A matrix is nice for a quick overview, but for such a decision you
need more in depth information and argumentation. A matrix could
only function as a tool to help with the decision.
true, but currently we dont have any overview at all
any tool is better than no tool, right ?
We use a very old tool: dialogue, discussion and argumentation. :)
Another one: try out and find the pros and cons yourself
Sharing of user and developer experiences
Then there is the NSM API documentation and the JackSession documentation.
But if you want to make such a matrix, go ahead, but it might be harder
to put it in a matrix then it looks at first sight.
\r
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
