>> >> I'll throw in my 2 Euro cents. >> >> If the VideoJACK crowd feels that JACK2 development is taking too >> slow and decide to continue with their fork, may I suggest that we >> all still discuss and draft a proper video API together? If a fork >> happens out of practical reasons, it would be best to make sure >> that switching video software to use JACK2 later on will be as >> painless as possible. >> >> Technical issues aside, I wish that those affiliated with VideoJACK >> do not feel that their needs are neglected by the JACK developers. >> I hope that the recent discussion has proved that people in this >> camp are willing to improve JACK in this respect. Perhaps we could >> move on and try to find more common ground? >> >> Juuso > > Yes sure. > > Where is the latest state of the video patch for jack? I can have a > look and see how easy/difficult it would be to implement that in a > jackdmp/jack2 branch. > > Stephane > >
It seems like porting the "video patch" to jackdmp/jack2 code base in a video branch should be quite easy. I can start working on that, if you think this is appropriate. Stephane _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
