[pulseaudio-discuss] Heads-up: the routing patches will start to get merged soon

[David Henningsson]

On 04/04/2014 11:31 AM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> I'm heading towards "a generic solution to our current routing issues",
> but that solution will depend on Murphy, which will provide the
> configurability and the default routing rules. In my opinion,
> implementing another solution with good configurability and
> better-than-current default routing without Murphy should be implemented
> by someone else, if a non-Murphy-based solution is desired.

(Just summing up what we discussed on IRC)

So the result from all this work is that normal desktop users will get
nothing, except an API and quite some infrastructure to maintain.

> If I understood correctly, you wish that I'd implement a full generic
> non-Murphy-based solution before merging the node infrastructure, but
> it's unclear to me whether that wish is a minimum requirement or not,
> and if it's not, what's the minimum requirement? 

I'm not sure what to answer to this question right now. I'd like to hear
what others have to say as well.

In addition, Colin Guthrie's patches two years ago which implement the
device priority lists should perhaps be revived, either instead of this
routing patch set, or in parallel/combination with it. Because that's
something that would actually bring benefit to users. And seen in
hindsight, we probably should have merged that patch set instead of
waiting for this routing patch set.

-- 
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
https://launchpad.net/~diwic