-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday February 24, 2003 07:15, Stefan Westerfeld wrote: > Hi! > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 06:29:39AM -0800, Neil Stevens wrote: > > On Monday February 24, 2003 05:17, Stefan Westerfeld wrote: > > > Adding CSL support to KDE right now seems to me the right thing to > > > do. It does not disturb people using aRts (because things will > > > continue to function exactly as they do now), but it helps people > > > not using aRts. And doesn't cost much to do it. > > > > That's fine, add CSL as an add-on. But as long as CSL is glib-tied, > > it's not the answer to KDE's needs. > > There is still some confusion, I think. > > * CSL = common sound layer > > Is a simple plain C API. You give it an audio stream. It plays it. You > ask it for an audio stream. It gives it to you. It does not have _any_ > dependancies. > > * BSE/SFK = bedevilled sound engine / synthesis fusion kit > > Is an aRts-like synthesis and effects thing using glib, currently > exclusively used in BEAST. I do not recommend adding it to KDE at this > point in time. If MCOP/SFI can be merged at some point in time remains > to be seen. This however would most certainly mean a glib dependancy for > the merged result. > > If this is inacceptable for aRts for some reason (it may for whatever > reason not be my right to decide what is right for aRts and what not, > even although I have written a lot of code in aRts), then aRts will have > to remain without glib dependancy, and presumably without sane C > language binding. > > Strategically however deciding against glib for aRts in the future this > means that if you're a C coder (and there are a lot of these out there), > aRts will not be for you, which means loosing potential > contributors/users. Well, I'm already seeing complaints about just a glib *dependency*, but that's not what I mean. I'll try to be more clear: KDE apps shoudln't have to use a glib API, and KDE developers shoudln't have to use glib to write new extensions to the KDE-chosen media system. > If you look at Arts::Thread, Arts::Dispatcher, arts/gsl/gslglib* you > will see that aRts is duplicating quite some glib functionality even > today. At some point however, using glib, or alternatively, using Qt > might be cheaper than duplicating everything. > > Currently I however refuse to consider depending aRts on a GUI toolkit, > whereas glib would only be a moderately sized C portability library. In > fact, I would even think that depending Qt on glib would be a very wise > decision interoperability wise, because it would open a much easier path > towards in-process coexistence of GNOME and KDE code snippets. In theory, glib is not a GUI toolkit, no. But in practice, glib is a foundation of the GNOME system, and is not used in KDE. This puts KDE developers at a severe disadvantage if the KDE media system makes you use it. But maybe I am confused. I hope you'll set me straight. Coudl you put up a webpage explaining just what CSL is? All I can find on the aRts page are announcements of CSL, and a few slides saying GNOME should use aRts. :-) - -- Neil Stevens - neil@qualityassistant.com "Distinctions by race are so evil, so arbitrary and insidious that a state bound to defend the equal protection of the laws must not allow them in any public sphere." -- Thurgood Marshall -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+WkCrf7mnligQOmERAvr6AJkBDP9PUZ5uwH9Vc1qf/poMWCg2qgCghQAo wnKiS2KESlKJyFYDz1lPzVE= =1y7R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ kde-multimedia mailing list kde-multimedia@mail.kde.org http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia