On Tue, 2016-01-12 at 09:45 +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Tue, 2016-01-12 at 17:05 +1100, Chris Billington wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Just to bump this thread, what are the odds of getting this patch included > > in pulseaudio? It would be useful to many of the network audio streaming > > services that use pulseaudio (specifically my one :p). > > The odds are good, since this is a welcome addition. I don't know when > the patch will be merged, however (in any case it's too late for 8.0). > I don't promise a quick review myself due to lack of time. Peter > already commented, though, and he is able to approve patches. Peter, do > you plan to review this newest version of the patch? > > I do have some comments from just glancing at the patch, though: > > It would have been nice to separate the patch to the part that modifies > the protocol and the part(s) that add the new feature to pactl and > pacmd. > > The commit message should contain the justification for the change > (which you provided in a separate mail). > > The references to 8.0 need to be changed to 9.0. > > It would be good to have better separation between the sink/source > latency offset and the port latency offset. The patch doesn't seem to > handle it particularly well if a sink has a latency offset set and the > same sink also has a port that has a latency offset set. It would make > sense to add those two together when querying the sink latency. > > It would be good to save the offset on disk. The place to do that would > be module-device-restore. If you try to implement this, however, it > might turn out to be a bit tricky, because module-device-restore deals > with both per-sink and per-port entries depending on whether the sink > has ports. The sink latency offset should not be saved separately for > each port, but it's not obvious how to achieve that when module-device- > restore is in the "per-port mode". I forgot one more thing that would be good to have: updates to the bash and zsh completion files. --Â Tanu
