On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 10:32 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 11:34 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > We wrote use cases, we checked what other systems did, and we intend > > to > > present something to the user that's less complicated than showing up > > all the knobs PulseAudio offers. > > Here's the other thing that gets me about this: okay, so you thought > about the use cases you want to support and came up with a design. > Great. > > But we don't even have that design yet. That design includes input > switching and profile switching. Tell me where I wrote that: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/VolumeControl#User_Experience <snip rant> *Where* I already asked this question when Will made the same assumption as you did, during the Fesco meeting. The use cases we had didn't include any need for profile switching. Yes we realised late we'd need it for some use cases, no, we didn't decide to ship an unfinished volume control that we knew would impact some use cases we didn't think of. And we already knew that we'd need profile switching for some things that we couldn't have before: - out-of-the-box multi-speaker setup support - multi-speakers testing - Bluetooth audio profile switching and service reservation (eg. only play stereo audio play through the headphones, and let a mobile phone connect to the headset, music stops when you receive a call) A couple of benefits from the current volume control compared to the old one: - "default" input and output control - microphone level checks - sound effects level control - per-application volume control (for apps that support it) The only use case(s) that we haven't catered for are for people who want to record things, and the sound card has more than 1 input. Yes, it's a big omission, but that doesn't mean you're allowed to write off the benefits we're bringing for a large number of users already. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
