N. Gey wrote: > I'm not a developer but a user who wants to know why certain things in > open source are what they are. > > I want to know why LASH is unsupported by so many programms. Mostly sad > for the "big" programms like Ardour, Rosegarden, Linuxsampler and all > these... > > JACK is a superior concept and nearly all programms happily integrated a > Jack client. > > In my opinion LASH is a same fundamental concept to connect the "one > function - one programm" philosophy to an audio workspace, like JACK > already does. > > So why is there so low interest in LASH? Hi N: It's a good question, and it's obviously stumped the crowd at LAU. ;) I'm not sure why there's apparently little interest, but I'll hazard a few guesses: 1) There aren't enough developers working on advancing, stabilizing, and maintaining the system. 2) It's not so simple to bolt LASH on to an existing app as it is to do the same with JACK. 3) Not enough users are interested. These are *guesses*, not facts. Perhaps one of the devs listening on on LAU will enlighten us ? :) Best, dp _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
