On 2014-06-24 11:34, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > David suggested merging the volume and mute control implementations at > least in the server code. I didn't first quite understand what that > would mean in practice, but now that I've worked on the code for a > while, I see that David was right. A lot of duplication can be avoided > if volume and mute controls share some of the implementation in one way > or another. I'm not sure if this should be reflected also in the client > API. I think it should, or all clients will have to duplicate their code... I remember thinking that pa_ext_volume_api_bvolume should include a "int mute" field. Then every mute specific stuff, including mute controls, can be skipped. -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
