1 Sep 2009 01:17
Re: Priorities for sinks/source
Lennart Poettering <lennart <at> poettering.net>
2009-08-31 23:17:09 GMT
2009-08-31 23:17:09 GMT
On Sun, 30.08.09 17:31, Colin Guthrie (gmane <at> colin.guthr.ie) wrote: Heya! > Do you have any objection to making these priorities user adjustable via > the protocol in some way? I know you intend this to be more or less > automatic for general out of the box use, but as we've discussed before, > the KDE GUI exposes the priority to the user. Hmpf. Read access to this variable might be an ok thing to do. But write access? naah You should not overestimate the meaning of this field. It should be used only for tie breaking if otherwise more than one sink (resp. source) are candidates for *a particular purpose*. That means that most of the time the field is not used and should not be used at all. Now, more specifically, when *should* it be used? Right now it is used only for selecting the initial default sink/source. But later on it should be used as well for example when a sink is removed that was the configured default for a specific role and we need to find a new sink for a stream of this role. As you know I think that the KDE UI for device configuration is not a particular ... let's say ... convincing design. So trying to bend the stuff we already have in PA so that it fits what this (misdesigned in my eyes) KDE UI needs seems the wrong way to do this.(Continue reading)
:D FWIW, I got my own name wrong! I actually called it
module-device-manager. That certainly doesn't help things :p
URL is here in my "history" branch (hence why I called the module the
wrong thing!):
RSS Feed