Re: snd_ prefix for module options

["Jack O'Quin" <joq@io.com>]

Peter L Jones <peter@drealm.org.uk> writes:

> I think it's not so nice.  Anyone running ALSA 0.9 should know it's
> not a "release" version and be happy to have (some breakage).  If
> all that's needed is a quick edit of modules.conf, it shouldn't
> cause too many power-users grief.  Those using distro upgrade tools
> should let their distro maintainer sort it out for them.

This whole thread makes no sense to me at all.

Can someone please explain what terrible problem we're trying to solve
that justifies introducing *any* breakage at all?

I don't mean to single out Peter for this one statement.  But, I am
totally frustrated with the attitude that ALSA is only for power users
and that it's OK to introduce spurious incompatibilities on a whim.

The excuse that 0.9 is not a "release" is wearing thin these days.
Since 0.5, which *is* a release, is "no longer supported", what are
ordinary users expected to run?  OSS?

ALSA is part of the 2.5 kernel now.  It is mainstream Linux software,
good technology, needed by many users.  Isn't it about time to start
thinking and acting that way?
-- 
  Jack O'Quin
  Austin, Texas, USA



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf