On 12.11.2011 21:21, Colin Guthrie wrote: > Ben Bucksch wrote: >> On 09.11.2011 11:56, Colin Guthrie wrote: >>> Now consider two users on an accessible system: One is visually impaired >>> the other is not >> - at the same time. OK, but that's really an unrealistic case now. > No I meant two users on the system. Only one uses the machine at any > given time. > > My point was mainly that the control over whether the sounds from the > underlying services (be it mpd or some accessibility layer) should be > user choice, not forced upon them. Yes, sure. And with pulse, that's trivial: *If* such a daemon really is running and disturbing, it's easy to silence via pavucontrol. > mpd as a daemon shouldn't be forced upon any user Please check the scenario I outlined again (copied again below). That was a real case, of a friend who dropped pulseaudio, because that wasn't workable. I have a similar setup, but no problem, because I have a dedicated HTPC machine that is always running, and always with the same user account. >> More realistic is: An average couple, he is a unix geek. He has a >> notebook and a tablet. The notebook is connected to speakers, running >> mpd for music. Tablet is running mpdroid and controls the mpd. >> >> The notebook has 2 users (but never at the same time), so the geek >> doesn't want to log in to any particular account just to listen >> music, but wants mpd to work irregardless of the logged-in user. >> >> There's no conflict, because if the music disturbs her, she'll just >> turn around and tell him to stop. Which, I think, will be true for >> almost all cases where you have 2 humans around the same computer at >> the same time. If you don't know mpd, please check it out. The whole idea is that I can control from several clients, but the playback is done by the server. And it's *really* cool, esp. combined with an Android tablet. Ben
