On 04/01/21 00:20, J. Liles wrote:
For the bystanders: one thing that's funny about all this is that I
use Non every day, including NSM, and I have a very low tolerance for
buggy/crashy software, and in all this time, with all the fork drama
etc. I've worked on Non, adding things I need, fixing bugs I
encounter. Well, in all of that, I can't recall having needed to make
a single change to NSM. It just works. So this idea that there's is or
was some dire usability issue with NSM is to me laughable.)
The link I posted from Nils disagrees with you.
https://linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=21772&p=121745#p121745
It is expected that it works for you.
My tools also work for me, but then people find issues by doing things I
am not doing. Bugs are still there, even if I dont ever experience them.
Sure, there are many things I wish I had. Fillipe says that JACKPatch
has some "usability problem." I disagree. It is what it is.
To be clear here. The issue is that jackpatch ignores applications that
are no longer running.
If you have a session where you temporarily want to stop closing
something just to focus on one part of it, then save, connections for
all the other applications are lost.
It is very annoying when it happens, often misinterpreted as a bug of
the SM.
I have a few ideas on how to go about solving/working-around it, and
others have alternative ideas. There was no true consensus yet.
Maybe it is just not something for jackpatch to deal with, but a new
tool. You seem to think the same way from what I understand on the
messages below.
But it would be nice to have a better connection manager than Patchage
to pair with it, and maybe some extra info from the JACK API to
identify certain tricky scenarios that JACKPatch currently has no way
to know about. Maybe if I could drive home the NSM "everything is a
client" philosophy a little harder, people would stop blaming NSM for
being incomplete, when the fact is that it was never intended to be a
complete solution for anything other than supporting sessions of
clients. Clients therefore, are the seat of your extensibility. Write
a client that does something cool and you can have all the fame you
like and with no obligation to share it with me or NSM.
On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 4:09 PM Filipe Coelho <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 03/01/21 23:57, rosea.grammostola wrote:
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, January 4, 2021 12:47 AM, Filipe Coelho
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
1. the new-session-manager fork was done by Nils, not me. I
appreciated the effort and contributed some little things
afterwards.
The idea for a fork was yours Filipe. You're fully responsible
for it, together with Nils. There is no point in denying or
downplaying your role.
Huh? Where did you get this from?
I approved the idea of a fork, yes. Not sure if I was the first
one to suggest it, I am pretty sure a bunch of people thought
about it too.
I did say that I would maintain the "old" GUI if needed, you can
point the finger at me for that.
But wait, just because I have an idea for something, how does it
make me responsible for it?
It would not have happened if others did not have interest on it.
Stop making it all on me.
Thanks
