Re: [Jack-Devel] The Situation(s) With JACK
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 08:55:17AM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
> i don't think that *anyone* believes that the C code base of JACK1 is
> an appropriate thing to keep developing. certainly I do not. even
> though its actually easier to add a new callback to JACK1 than to
> JACK2, its completely obvious that the JACK1 codebase is dead as a
> future/longterm development path.
1. I'm not at all convinced that Paul's statement quoted above is
true. Sure, the jack1 code would benefit from a 'spring cleanup'.
Which is only normal after all those years (*). And I also think
it could be the basis of a C++ implementation that would be a bit
more transparent than the Jack2 one. There is a lot of 'object'
style thinking in it as it is.
2. A completely separate matter - I'd like to ask and invite
anyone to respond: is there any serious Linux Audio *USER*
out there who cares about Jack on Windows ? I certainly do not.
All I want is the best possible tools on Linux (and let OSX be
a corner case). Note that I'm asking *USERS*. For a developer
there may be some gratification in knowing that his/her work is
invading the proprietary world. He/she may even believe that
this will lure Windows users into switching to Linux. I don't
think that it would: the better it works on Windows the less
reason anyone has to change.
Ciao,
(*) Writing this I can't help thinking of Paul Simon's 'Still
crazy...'.
--
FA
Vor uns liegt ein weites Tal, die Sonne scheint - ein Glitzerstrahl.
1323898517.24055_0.ltw:2,a <20111214213504.GA18943 at linuxaudio dot org>