Re: [Rosegarden-devel] impressive

[Chris C. <ca...@al...>]

On Friday 09 Dec 2005 23:43, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> Who cares, really. I'm mean seriously, they're up to their 4th
> iteration of this, and jack and alsa are both so darn frickin' poorly
> packaged and complicated to set up.
>
> Well, telling them that would be a good reason to go.

"Them"?  Them who?  That mysterious international cabal of developers 
openly going about trying to make your life as difficult as possible, 
and even organising conferences to discuss and refine their evil plans?

It's one thing to rant theatrically about systems you personally are 
having trouble with -- I do that too and enjoy it -- but quite another 
to start drawing practical conclusions, like it's not worth even 
talking to those terrible people who made that ALSA thing you're having 
such difficulties with.

Maybe even more so than Rosegarden, packaging ALSA and JACK should 
really be a distribution matter.  On a desktop-oriented distribution in 
this century, starting JACK should be at most a question of finding 
qjackctl in the K menu (or equivalent) and selecting it.  ALSA is part 
of the kernel; JACK itself is really easy to install, certainly when 
compared to big GUI applications like Rosegarden.  The problem is that 
they're both useless unless your kernel is suitable and your soundcard 
has drivers.  So, what would you have the developers of JACK or ALSA do 
differently?


Chris