[pulseaudio-discuss] Anyone heard of RoarAudio?

[Tanu Kaskinen]

On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:45 +0100, Colin Guthrie wrote:
> 'Twas brillig, and Colin Guthrie at 05/08/10 12:16 did gyre and gimble:
> > It's not really clear to me what it is or what it is trying to do over
> > and above PulseAudio's capabilities:
> > 
> > http://roaraudio.keep-cool.org/
> 
> Having looked a little beyond the marketing fluff, it seems to me to be
> totally lacking in almost all regard!

Totally lacking in almost all regard? Using what criteria? To me it
looks like RoarAudio provides a respectable amount of features.

Anyway, I would also like to hear about the goals of the RoarAudio
developers. Since to my knowledge there has been about zero
communication between these two projects, I doubt I'll get any answers
from pulseaudio-discuss, so I'll cross-post this to the RoarAudio
mailing list.

I found this in the manual:

"It is designed to replace the very old sound server Enlightened Sound
Daemon (EsounD) and add modern features as well as features needed by
Radio and TV Stations. This includes support for Web Streaming via
Icecast and simular software."

(I think this should be on the front page of the project web site.)
According to that description the goals are to be Gnome's chosen sound
system and also to be the best system for radio/tv station web
streaming. I don't see much point in the first goal (I believe
PulseAudio was a fine ESD replacement already two years ago when the
first release of RoarAudio was made), but the web streaming part sounds
sensible.

So, how do you, RoarAudio people, see the role of all the various sound
servers on Linux? My view is that PulseAudio is the best solution for
general desktop use, while Jack is very good for music production (and
many other "pro-audio" use cases). Do you agree? Would RoarAudio then be
the best choice for streaming live content on the web?

-- 
Tanu Kaskinen