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

[Tanu Kaskinen]

On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 13:59 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
> 
> On 2014-04-22 11:06, Colin Guthrie wrote:
> > Hiya,
> >
> > 'Twas brillig, and David Henningsson at 22/04/14 09:41 did gyre and gimble:
> >> On 2014-04-17 12:41, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2014-04-04 at 15:50 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
> >>>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> Others were silent, so in the absence of permission from you to do
> >>> anything else I think I'll have to work with the assumption that I will
> >>> need to provide some kind of configurable non-Murphy-based routing
> >>> module before the routing infrastructure can be accepted to master.
> >>
> >> Well, I'd much prefer to hear more opinions about it. It's difficult for
> >> me to know as well.
> >
> > Sorry, I've been somewhat slow to comment on this.
> 
> Better late than never :-)
> 
> > Is there a simple summary of the hooks etc. added by the Murphy patches
> > that would be available to said alternative routing system?
> 
> I'd like to add the question - compared to the current git master, would 
> the routing patch set make it any easier to implement Colin's priority 
> lists? Or would it be about the same (or even make things more complicated)?

It would be about the same.

-- 
Tanu