On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:26:16AM +0200, Lieven Moors wrote: > So the shared data would not be read-only after all...
It is read-only to all the sessions in which it is used for mixdown into some format. It is evidently not read-only to the session that created that data. > Isn't this a little bit dangerous? Not if you have a well defined workflow and know what you are doing, and I generally do. > I can see this could work with certain kinds of apps > that are non-destructive. But how do you know that > doing edits to the data in one session doesn't make > the other invalid. Because I know what I'm doing. If I edit the original recording for some reason (e.g. replacing a few measures by another take), then I expect the mixdown sessions to pick up the change if they are re-run. If I wouldn't want that I'd duplicate the data into each mixdown session instead. The 'dangerous' thing happens only because I want it. Having the option to do this doesn't affect any other user who doesn't want to do the same. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
