On 02/22/2011 10:12 PM, David Robillard wrote:
As far as I am concerned, this is all about Libre audio software anyway,
and I disagree with the name of this list/site (who actually cares about
the specific kernel?). Getting e.g. OSX people on board is a part of
making the LAD 'platorm' a success.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Nick Copeland
wrote:
> This list as far as I can remember has always been full of righteous
> opinions, and by pretty much all of its subscribers, Paul.
I think you're projecting. I love what you do for the audio
community, but your demeaning behavior makes you
Excerpts from David Robillard's message of 2011-02-22 22:12:56 +0100:
--snip--
> Put simply:
>
> "I don't care about portability" == "Nobody cares about my software".
>
> -dr
Simply not true. I do agree however that portability (==OS independence)
is a good idea for a plugin API. However, we a
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 19:48 +, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 07:32:58PM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
> >
> > > X11 hides the hardware and allows the app to be independent of it, just
> > > as do
> > > Jack for audio, sockets for networking, etc. Do you suggest that I should
> does this (sub)dialog need to be so ... personal? so exclusive? so
> full of the righteousness of its proponents' viewpoints that there's
> no room for plurality, or doubt?
This list as far as I can remember has always been full of righteous
opinions, and by pretty much all of its subscribers,
On Tuesday 22 February 2011 21:36:11 Nick Copeland wrote:
> > OK, let's make a few thing clear. I write for Linux. This list
> > is called "Linux Audio Developers". I don't care a second if my
> > apps are not portable to OSX, windows, or whatever you like.
>
> So lets make a few other things clea
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Nick Copeland
wrote:
[ ]
does this (sub)dialog need to be so ... personal? so exclusive? so
full of the righteousness of its proponents' viewpoints that there's
no room for plurality, or doubt?
___
Linux-audio-dev
> OK, let's make a few thing clear. I write for Linux. This list
> is called "Linux Audio Developers". I don't care a second if my
> apps are not portable to OSX, windows, or whatever you like.
So lets make a few other things clear:
Maemo is Linux and a bog standard X app would perhaps just work
> > I didn't follow the whole discussion, but I just want to toss out one
> > not-so-stupid-as-it-may-seem possibility: HTML + CSS + JS. Take a look
> > at YUI.
>
> I don't think it's stupid at all. Saying using browser technology for UI
> is stupid these days is the height of short-sightedness.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 07:32:58PM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
>
> > X11 hides the hardware and allows the app to be independent of it, just as
> > do
> > Jack for audio, sockets for networking, etc. Do you suggest that I should
> > not
> > use Jack or sockets because e.g. Windows doesn't have t
> X11 hides the hardware and allows the app to be independent of it, just as do
> Jack for audio, sockets for networking, etc. Do you suggest that I should not
> use Jack or sockets because e.g. Windows doesn't have them (natively) ?
Actually yes, I am suggesting you don't use Jack or Sockets if
11 matches
Mail list logo
