Re: [LAD] Non-DAW's Session Handling Requirements

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <linux-audio-dev@...>
Date: Friday, May 16, 2008 - 11:53 pm

--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

malnourite@gmail.com writes:

> -+--- Overview - - -

I think almost everybody dislikes the current API so you got some
followers for sure ;)

> -+--- Basic Concerns - - -

Do you need to know LASH project path or you need to know the directory
path where your project data resides? I think there is nothing wrong
with providing the later.

> 2. The need to be informed of, or else be able to query at any time,

I dont see anything wrong with this, we can have both query function and
signals. In fact we already have some signals to serve in the dbus branch.

> Additionally, the following would be required in order to fully integrate

planned already

> 2. Ability to save the current project as a template.

planned already

> 3. Ability to initiate a save of the entire LASH project.

even non-dbus implementation has this AFAIK

> 4. Ability to choose from a list of LASH projects to load.

already working. In dbus branch we have GetProjects method instead of
reading audio projects directory on client side.

> Some of the above are already possible to some extent with the current

I think API division is right thing to have. However there should be no
artificial restriction of being both regular and control app. AFAIK it
is in Juuso's plans to remove this artificial restriction.

> Non-DAW and Non-Sequencer have the ability to change to a new project/song

Maybe crazy idea, but we could have some of lash clients to export dbus
object to be controlled without restarting. And to make things even more
crazy, this matches my prefered "launch LASH apps only through lashd"
scenario. With apps being registered in database. So far we use existing
desktop entries infrastructure for launching apps through lashd. We
could use autolaunched dbus services too. Juuso, what you think?

> I would also like to see the preferred behavior of new/save/load

I agree. These things need to be documented.

> Is it really advisable for LASH clients to operate on their state,

IMHO we should give recomendation but I'm against trying to force
things. We should the users participate in evolution instead of us
trying to enforce things as Gods of Code ;)

> -+--- Additional Thoughts - - -

already planned

> * Project grouping (eg. all songs for an album) for easy management

already planned

> * Global Undo/Redo functionality (simply sends a message to all clients

not that i dislike the idea, but i prefer to defer such functionality
for later incarnation of LASH. Unless someone is really motivated to
work on this now.

> * Looser integration with/no direct dependance on JACK.

For LASH client or for lashd? I personally consider LASH tightly coupled
with JACK in the terms of user workflow. Thus I assume lashd and LASH
apps interacting directly with JACK. However, with jackdbus approach,
only LASH apps have direct dependance of JACK (i.e. are linked against
libjack). lashd uses jackdbus instead. LASH control app probably does
not interact with JACK server at all. The only possible exception I know
so far is to get JACK settings preset from JACK multiconfig object. But
I consider that separate module, not directly coupled with JACK itself.

I'll use this thread to announce the LADI project to this mailing
list. I maintain some documentation in my wiki:

http://nedko.arnaudov.name/wiki/moin.cgi/LADI

The above page has link to the "D-Bus interactions between components in
LADI system" diagram:

http://nedko.arnaudov.name/soft/ladi/ladi-dbus-interactions.png

There is also page dedicated to LASH in LADI system (LASH + D-Bus):

http://nedko.arnaudov.name/wiki/moin.cgi/lashdbus

=2D-=20
Nedko Arnaudov

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBILh5v6bb4v94XFrARApkjAJ0Ui0mfhtdjbhfg2s6U+XxOXCaR2QCdHh5+
dcgEp9HxxhatsYAv1QMW7Wo=
=CFka
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [LAD] Non-DAW's Session Handling Requirements, Nedko Arnaudov, (Fri May 16, 11:53 pm)