On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 18:58 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > I know you mean well by trying to simplify this entire mess (I hated the > > old Volume Control, it was too much), but on the other hand this seems > > to be a messy problem and taking too much control from the user is a > > mistake. At least that's what my intuition is telling me, FWIW. > > If we don' try to fix it then this will never be fixed. I agree -- it is a wonderful thing that we're trying to fix this, and I applaud your efforts. But we have to acknowledge that we cannot always get it 100% right, and that we _do_ need to let the user have ultimate control. Even ignoring the 'esoteric' use cases, I don't think we're ever going to see an end to bugs like #493790 or the last part of #497698. It's all very well saying that the ALSA hardware database should know everything -- but it _doesn't_, and realistically speaking it never will. It doesn't even know about the 'Front' control on my MacBook Pro -- so if I didn't have gnome-alsamixer, the F-11 installation would just be inexplicably quieter than F-10 was. You can argue that that's a bug in the database, and even that it's someone _else's_ database so it's not your problem. And you'd be right, to a certain extent. But you seem to be missing the point that there will _always_ be bugs in the database, and it's _your_ code which has suddenly promoted that database from being a 'convenience' to a 'mission critical' thing, by relying on it 100% and giving the user no override. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx Intel Corporation -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
