Why not both? Use either/or compile options:
--enable-jacksession --enable-dbus The bit you forgot to mention is the lack of network session capability using your dbus method. It's still not suitable for clusters. However Bob Ham, in an earlier post, explained this far better than i could, so reading up will bear fruit. He also eloquently highlighted the rapidly ensuing complexity of having to run multiple dbusses in some fashion to counter the limitations dbus has in providing cluster support. Far too complex, imho, compared to the simplicity, and minimal impact, jacksession has on the API. Torben has already proved this emphatically, imho, and as a user tester i found it SIMPLE and easy to use. Surely a criteria for any developer to consider. Add to that the ease at which he sessionised apps, with a few lines of code, compared with the wholesale reconstruction required by lash, for instance, and he makes a powerful and compelling case for jacksession as a modest additional component in the API. (imho) Jacksession, as a component, was accused of being insufficient, therefore dismissed out of hand, for being "80%". The situation is no better with a dbus version, and likely other constructs too. So lets compare apples with apples here, if only for fair assessment. Alex. On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Nedko Arnaudov <[email protected]> wrote: > Patrick Shirkey <[email protected]> writes: > >> From a normal users perspective we would need to have an interface that >> gave us the options: >> >> - killing already running apps before loading a session >> - attempting to rename the apps without restarting them >> - load a new jack instance and connect it with netjack > > I don't get why these features are supposed to need support from jack > itself. Session handler/manager starts the apps and it for sure knows > how to kill them (ladishd does this already). Renaming of the clients is > not needed for ladish to operate, because ladishd implements graph > virtualization and boxes you see on canvas (clients) can be renamed and > ports can be regrouped. For handling apps that use multiple JACK > clients, more useful will be to have a function that returns the > originally requested JACK client name. netjack has two main uses > (Internet and LAN) but I don't see how jack session callbacks relate to > it. ladish-2.0 (multihost capable) will be able to start additional jack > servers, local or remote and use netjack tehcnology to link them in > single multihost studio. > > -- > Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0> > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > > -- www.openoctave.org [email protected] [email protected] _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
