Phil Burk | 1 Feb 01:48 2011

Re: Plans for a newer stable release?

Looks good.

We could be more clear about what is needed for the next stable V19 
snapshot vs the V19-final release.

Phil

On 1/31/11 2:55 PM, Chris wrote:
> All -
>
> Please review the changes I have made to the version 19 release plan
> here: http://www.portaudio.com/trac/wiki/V19ReleasePlan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Portaudio mailing list
> Portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu
> http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/portaudio
>
>
Chris | 1 Feb 02:17 2011
Picon

Re: Plans for a newer stable release?

That's why I wanted people to review the open tickets.

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Burk <pburk <at> mobileer.com>
To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 4:48 pm
Subject: Re: [Portaudio] Plans for a newer stable release?

Looks good.

We could be more clear about what is needed for the next stable V19
snapshot vs the V19-final release.

Phil

On 1/31/11 2:55 PM, Chris wrote:
> All -
>
> Please review the changes I have made to the version 19 release plan
> here: http://www.portaudio.com/trac/wiki/V19ReleasePlan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Portaudio mailing list
> Portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu
> http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/portaudio
>
>
_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu
(Continue reading)

Phil Burk | 1 Feb 03:20 2011

Re: Plans for a newer stable release?


On 1/31/11 5:17 PM, Chris wrote:
 > That's why I wanted people to review the open tickets.

Yes. Thanks for doing that. It was a good idea. When we have an idea of 
the critical tickets then we can "be more clear about what is needed for 
the next stable V19 snapshot vs the V19-final release."

If we seem to be saying the same thing it is because we agree and not 
because we disagree.

Thanks,
Phil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Burk <pburk <at> mobileer.com>
> To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 4:48 pm
> Subject: Re: [Portaudio] Plans for a newer stable release?
>
>
> Looks good.
>
> We could be more clear about what is needed for the next stable V19
> snapshot vs the V19-final release.
>
> Phil
>
> On 1/31/11 2:55 PM, Chris wrote:
>> All -
(Continue reading)

Chris | 1 Feb 03:30 2011
Picon

Re: Plans for a newer stable release?

Everybody get busy and start reviewing the tickets that have been 
posted!

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Burk <pburk <at> mobileer.com>
To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 6:20 pm
Subject: Re: [Portaudio] Plans for a newer stable release?

On 1/31/11 5:17 PM, Chris wrote:
 > That's why I wanted people to review the open tickets.

Yes. Thanks for doing that. It was a good idea. When we have an idea of
the critical tickets then we can "be more clear about what is needed 
for
the next stable V19 snapshot vs the V19-final release."

If we seem to be saying the same thing it is because we agree and not
because we disagree.

Thanks,
Phil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Burk <pburk <at> mobileer.com>
> To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 4:48 pm
> Subject: Re: [Portaudio] Plans for a newer stable release?
>
>
(Continue reading)

Chris | 1 Feb 03:44 2011
Picon

Re: Open Tickets

Please add ticket #85 to the list:

#85 	Mac OS X may not work correctly with large block sizes 
	host-api-coreaudio 	new 		2.0 	defect 	minor 	bjornroche 	11/23/08

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris <c319chris <at> aol.com>
To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 3:28 pm
Subject: [Portaudio] Open Tickets

Below is a list of open tickets for Milestone V19-RC1. Let's see if we
can get a handle on what needs to be addressed before the next stable
release. If any of these issues have been fixed, please close the
ticket AND PLEASE POST HERE ON THE MAILING LIST THAT THE TICKET HAS
BEEN CLOSED!

The documentation tickets are probably not critical for the next V19
stable snapshot.

The TRAC query can be found here:
http://www.portaudio.com/trac/query?status=assigned&status=new&status=reopened&group=status&milestone=V19-RC1

Ticket 	Summary 	Owner 	Type 	Priority 	Component 	Version

BUGS

#5 	Make sure everything in test directory builds 	somebody 	defect
	blocker 	test 	2.0
#35 	some conversion functions are not implemented in pa_converters.c
(Continue reading)

Phil Burk | 1 Feb 04:00 2011

Re: Open Tickets

Chris wrote:
 > Please add ticket #85 to the list:

That was already on your list under "BUGS". Do you want it marked 
closed? Not sure what you are asking.

Phil

On 1/31/11 6:44 PM, Chris wrote:
> Please add ticket #85 to the list:
>
> #85 Mac OS X may not work correctly with large block sizes
> host-api-coreaudio new 2.0 defect minor bjornroche 11/23/08
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris <c319chris <at> aol.com>
> To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 3:28 pm
> Subject: [Portaudio] Open Tickets
>
>
> Below is a list of open tickets for Milestone V19-RC1. Let's see if we
> can get a handle on what needs to be addressed before the next stable
> release. If any of these issues have been fixed, please close the
> ticket AND PLEASE POST HERE ON THE MAILING LIST THAT THE TICKET HAS
> BEEN CLOSED!
>
> The documentation tickets are probably not critical for the next V19
> stable snapshot.
(Continue reading)

Chris | 1 Feb 04:22 2011
Picon

Re: Open Tickets

It was not on the original list. I added it to "bugs" for completeness.

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Burk <pburk <at> mobileer.com>
To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 7:00 pm
Subject: Re: [Portaudio] Open Tickets

Chris wrote:
 > Please add ticket #85 to the list:

That was already on your list under "BUGS". Do you want it marked
closed? Not sure what you are asking.

Phil

On 1/31/11 6:44 PM, Chris wrote:
> Please add ticket #85 to the list:
>
> #85 Mac OS X may not work correctly with large block sizes
> host-api-coreaudio new 2.0 defect minor bjornroche 11/23/08
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris <c319chris <at> aol.com>
> To: portaudio <portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 3:28 pm
> Subject: [Portaudio] Open Tickets
>
>
(Continue reading)

Chris | 1 Feb 06:07 2011
Picon

Re: Open Tickets

The open tickets, along with a link to the to-do list, have been added 
to the V19 Release Plan, located here: 
http://www.portaudio.com/trac/wiki/V19ReleasePlan

What needs to be addressed before the next stable build?

#5 and #82 should not be difficult to address.

#47 may not be difficult.

#56, #57 and #83 can probably be deferred, as well as the remaining 
enhancements and documentation.

There is a large number of unticketed items on the to-do list.
Ross Bencina | 1 Feb 08:08 2011

Re: Plans for a newer stable release?

Chris wrote:
> Please review the changes I have made to the version 19 release plan here: 
> http://www.portaudio.com/trac/wiki/V19ReleasePlan

v19-devel branch is no longer active, development of V19 was moved to trunk 
some time ago. The page should be updated to reflect that. Probably just 
renaming the first section to "V19 development status" and replacing 
"v19-devel" with "trunk" would be a good start.

http://www.portaudio.com/docs/proposals/status.html is out of date. I will 
merge unresolved issues from there into TRAC tickets -- after that should we 
just delete that page? do we want to maintain the API implementation 
matrixs -- if so, probably best to move them into TRAC Wiki.

"Plan for Next V19 Release" => best to split out separate main headings for 
"Next V19 stable snapshot" and "Roadmap to V19-final"

In its current state it is hard to comment on the "FEATURES" and "BUGS" 
lists because I am not sure whether you are really talking about 
V19-stable-snapshot-feb-2011 or if you're talking about V19-final -- there 
seems to be some confusion.

I would say:

V19-stable-snapshot-feb-2011:

- WASAPI QA

To be honest, I don't think it is a problem to post a snapshot with bugs in 
one host API -- this is just a stable snapshot, not a final polished 
(Continue reading)

Lei Jing | 1 Feb 08:12 2011
Picon

Can I use ASIO device with Blocking I/O API?

Hi,

I am trying to record 3 channels audio by using ASIO with M-AUDIO Fast track ultra 8R. I used the patest_record.c example by changing the default input device to ASIO device, it worked fine, I got two channel audio data. But I want to use the Blocking I/O mode, so I changed the Pa_GetDefaultInputDevice() to the ASIO device in the sample patest_read_record.c which uses the Blocking I/O API. I changed nothing more, but received error number: -9981;  message: input overflowed. I changed back to MME device, it worked. So I am wondering if the ASIO API supports Blocking I/O? Or I need to do something else?
  1. Implementation: ASIO. Built from Jan.15.2011 version.
  2. OS: Win32-XP-SP3.
  3. M-AUDIO Fast track ultra 8R.
  4. error number: -9981;  message:input overflowed
  5. Reproduce:change the Pa_GetDefaultInputDevice() to the ASIO device in the sample patest_read_record.c 
  6. No sound heard.
Thanks for your attention.

Best regards,

Russell
_______________________________________________
Portaudio mailing list
Portaudio <at> music.columbia.edu
http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/portaudio

Gmane