Hi ! Le jeudi 17 décembre 2009 09:52:31, Marcin Lewandowski a écrit : > I wonder how many users will use that feature. > > I work in a FM radio station, we create huge automation system. Liquidsoap > was considered as being heart of one, and it performs now that function, > but temporarily. We had made a decision to switch to our own solution, > based propably on GStreamer, after a few disappointments. > > Basically, I use liquidsoap for last +/- 3 years, and there were at least a > few moments that officialy released package wasn't stable or suffered from > regressions. To mention only one of them, not more that a few months ago, > ALSA output just stopped working after upgrade. Radio systems are realtime, > critical systems, they MUST WORK, and I think you had already forgot that > truth. The next big design change, that you had mentioned in your mail, is > just a next opportunity to make new bugs. And please tell me, who uses now > MIDI in the TV or radio? I've already stopped relying on liquidsoap, but > that is the final argument to switch.
Just to add a few words over what David and Samuel have say. Believe it or not, stability is a major issue for us. If you look at, for instance, the changelog of the latest stable release, a lot of work was put into testing and fixing issues. Now, building a complex system is not an easy task. The internal logic of the software is a first issue, but also dependencies on external other systems. The issue you mention with ALSA is a good example of this. I wonder if you have ever looked at ALSA's API, but, to my point, ALSA is a major mistake for the sound support in linux. It is neither properly low or high level, and its API is very complicated and undocumented, and suffers from issues from one release or another, or one card or another. On top of that, we try to do our best, but that often means providing several other alternatives, such as pulseaudio or JACK. I've also spent an enourmous time on trying to have a stable JACK support, for instance, so I take your comment somehow personally. As the other have said, we do not make any money from this software, nor require any from our users, and nevertheless, we put a lot of work into it and never refused any contribution. Even more, we provide a trac system for reporting issues, and, in the past, when users have taken the time to report issues, I believe we've given them as much feedback as we can, leading to fixes and new features. About the new features, we believe that an automation system for video extending our previous technology for audio would be a very interesting feature. We are not aware of any other software that can do it, and somehow, video streaming is probably the next step after audio for internet broadcasting. Now, I wonder why this mail, which is to my knowledge your first contact with us, carries so much frustration. Have you tried to contact us to share your issues during those +/- 3 years you've been using liquidsoap ? As we the other, I wish you sucess for your projects, nevertheless, but I feel a bit hurt by your comments. I believe there's better way of communicating that this. Romain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Savonet-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/savonet-users
