---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marc-André Lureau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jan 10, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: RFC - a casual sound API on fd.o?
To: Thiago Macieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


On 1/10/07, Thiago Macieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

idea to PortAudio/PortMusic, but from what I can tell, the goal is very
similar between you two. Why not join forces instead?

because portmusic goal is broader and in a very young stage. portaudio
concern is about portability. not defining  a common interface. But it
is an idea I am thinking of also. Iam not sure our goals can be
shared.


I think instead that applications could bypass your library and use the
Notification API instead.
Yes they should, if notification api cover such case. But then, which
api will be used by the daemon? why couldnt it benefit from the
flexibility of a common interface? and leave the choice to the
distrib?

Again, I see overlap between the two. Why not join forces?

This is all about joining forces. at least in my pov.

Notification is not to be abused to be an audio player.

i couldnt agree more.


My point (below) was that one library doesn't impact too much, the trend
of many libraries does. If we can avoid it, we shouldn't have an extra

Agree. an interface proposal doesnt say where what library provide it.
Altthough it explicitly suggest as a thin wrapper library that could
be linked statically.

library. Your API could conceivably fit inside libdapi.
I did not thought about that. it seems some ideas have already been
discussed for dapi audio iface. that might be a good place for it
then.


No. I meant the whole audio implementation. Desktops already have audio

I really don't suggest to write yet again a new implementation. the
goal is to define iface that could become a thin wrapper either in
existing audio or desktop lib or new library.


I see three kinds of audio events, in my small view of the world:
1) notifications (reactions to user input or other events)
2) sound tracks from games or websites
3) complex audio output stemming from multimedia players (sometimes
requiring video synchronisation)

good to know that you are as limited as I do.

#1 is definitely libnotify's job.

Ok, but it might be cool to have the choice over the backend, and
expect it to react the same way if I glue a plugin or an intrusive
code.

#3 is definitely not and also definitely
not your job either.

of course.

So we end up with #2: do we need an extra lib?

I don't see any library or interface that covers what wa usually need
with flexibility and non abusive design.

One more thing: have you verified if there is a demand for this kind of
API on a cross-desktop basis?

Come on. We are on xdg!! should i spam every ml?

but if this is restricted to GNOME, it might
be better to fix there.

That was the initial plan. As you say, joigning forces could be
possible. Furthermore, this not really dependant on gnome, nor gtk,
nor gib...
--
Marc-André Lureau, GSmartMix


--
Marc-André Lureau, GSmartMix
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg

Reply via email to