On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 18:45:15 -0500 David Robillard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-02-23 at 23:44 +0100, Alex Stone wrote: > [...] > > As a user of NSM, and from that user perspective, it does what it says > > on the tin. It's user friendly, and helps administer the process of > > starting up my large sessions with no rocket science involved. > > > > Given the strong wills, and previous scorch marks in the ML about > > session management, i have no desire to light a match here, but for > > the simple task of starting a succession of apps in a session, NSM > > does its job well, imho. > > > > How much code is required in apps to enable them for NSM use? > > > > Is there an appetite for at least one session management app that does > > the simple stuff well that users can become familiar with as a > > "linuxaudio" basic default, as a "unified" community protocol > > agreement, without descending into hades and a flame war, in the > > interest of taking the community forward, and giving users a better > > experience? > > Oh boy, *this*, again. > > In retrospect, replying to this thread at all is surely the dumbest > thing I will do today. Nevermind. Which means the person who started the thread must surely be the dumbest person on earth, or something. Could you elaborate please: why is compatibility between the existing session management systems a dumb idea? Is it because if something would work together in the Linux audio world in a reasonable way, there would be danger of somebody actually using it? Please enlighten me. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
