From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: Jack event API - decision needed Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:35:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20110628163523.GA21570@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <4DFF4D15.6050809@canonical.com> <20110627120743.GA20707@sirena.org.uk> <4E0A00E3.5000102@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA8D103896 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:35:29 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E0A00E3.5000102@canonical.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: David Henningsson Cc: Takashi Iwai , ALSA Development Mailing List , Kay Sievers , Lennart Poettering List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:27:15PM +0100, David Henningsson wrote: > As such, it makes the most sense for me to continue working on the > existing input layer API for the time being. If or when a new API is > announced and finished, rewriting the pulseaudio patches to target > that API will probably make sense. But we're not there today, and > the time schedule for getting there is unknown. > If upstream udev/PulseAudio would be willing to merge my (existing > and upcoming) patches, I would appreciate that, as I believe that > would make both our lives easier. If not, well at least make a note > that I /tried/ to do things the right way, and to make everybody > happy - which is not always possible. FWIW I tend to agree that pragmatically it'd make a lot of sense to support the current kernel interfaces in userspace even if we're also going to decide to deprecate them, if only for the deployment reasons you mention.