[vlc-devel] [PACKAGERS] [RFCv2] PulseAudio removal
linkfanel at yahoo.fr
Thu Apr 7 23:30:03 CEST 2011
> No this is completely untrue.
> PA specifically goes out of it's way to provide both accurate (with a
> penalty for retrieval) and very well interpolated timing information
> specifically for the needs of applications that need to synchronise
> sound with other things, such as video. This is one of the specific
> uses of this information.
Okay, that's awesome! I'm glad that this is cleared up. Now it's just
too bad that all of these nice things have been broken in VLC.
> PA is also specifically designed to use lower power in mobile
> environments - e.g. tablets, phones, laptops etc. by encouraging the use
> of large buffers and disabling interrupts. We specifically do things in
> a way that is friendly for the environment in which it's used. This
> includes power consumption and timing information.
Great! But that sounds unrelated... unless you plan on contributing a
mobile GUI to VLC, so that we can leverage the power of PulseAudio on
> > Wow. And I guess that's what gstreamer uses? Sounds like there
> > is a deliberate intent to obfuscate the API to deter efforts of
> > interoperability with frameworks other than the "preferred" one
> > supported by the developers.
> I'm sorry but this is complete bullshit. I don't blame you for assuming
> this from Rémi's initial email, but I have to correct it.
> The documentation is very clear.
Erm, I guess that "very" wasn't clear enough... But hopefully this issue
is being sorted out.
> Please do not make such statements flippantly without researching them a
> little first. It's a common courtesy to the people putting in the effort
> on such projects.
Please do not break other people's stuff (software) flippantly without
stepping up to fix them a little after. It's a common courtesy to the
people in general life.
> > That's shocking, but given the above, I guess that the conclusion is
> > that "competition" is not supposed to be at all!
> Again, this is Rémi's own stance but one which I firmly refute.
> Lennart focuses on GST because that's the framework most closely aligned
> to his daily usage. He is perfectly within his rights to do so and I
> would go as far as to say that's a sensible approach for an upstream
Well so much for courtesy...
> The GST code is fully open and viewable for reference. It's not like
> it's hidden away. While Lennart may have helped out a bit with the GST
> implementation, the vast majority of it was written by third parties,
> just like in VLC's pulse support.
Okay! I'm sure that can help, along with the clarifications about the
API. Even though I heard that that GST code was of dubious quality.
> > Is it necessary to disable it? It could still be useful for users who
> > have only PulseAudio available. Although quite frankly, I'm not sure
> > that a project that is trying to drive off other players deserves our
> > good will.
> Again, you're taking Rémi's viewpoint here without any evidence. Please
> point out where we are "driv[ing] off other players"? I have continually
> pushed PulseAudio support in various corners of FOSS development.
Well, of course not, you're not going to openly acknowledge wreaking
havoc in the audio world and leaving behind broken software because
it's "perfectly within your right to do so" as "driving off". Then,
maybe you can see your words above and below: you're pushing PulseAudio
everywhere, and got a monopoly on the Linux audio stack default?...
Congratulations, I can tell that your goal is peaceful coexistence.
> Every single major Linux distribution uses PulseAudio by default.
I didn't know that Debian switched to PulseAudio, when did that happen?
Or maybe it doesn't count as a major distro. It makes me feel like such
a nerd for using it :(
> It doesn't happen magically by itself, it needs people to do the work.
> I really cannot understand peoples attitudes (and this goes for some
> KDE people too) who just expect things to magically happen. You have
> to engage with the community and you have to embrace things if you
> want them to be supported. It's really not that complex.
> Here are some articles you are welcome to read:
> plus anything else on there with a pulseaudio tag...
> Rémi's bubble of intolerance is not the only way. Make up your own mind.
Okay, I followed your advice and tried to make up my own opinion by
trusting you and listening to what your very informative article says.
Your nice talk downplaying the incompatibilities caused by PulseAudio
managed to convince me that except for evil closed applications like
Skype, the wonder age of PulseAudio would magically happen by itself. Oh
"Une âme dans un corps, c'est comme un dessin sur une feuille de papier."
More information about the vlc-devel