[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Considerations for 'xmms' removal from Debian

Hash: SHA1

Michal Čihař wrote:
> Hi
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 09:25:21 +0300
> Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 04:22:59AM +0200, David Lopez Zajara (Er_Maqui) wrote:
>>> xmms2... Well, when we have a decent client, then can are an option.
>>> Now, isn't it.
>> Same as with mpd :-/
> Have you tried to report missing features to authors of some client? Eg.
> Sonata upstream is usually very responsive on suggestions.

The point isn't report "missing features" to the main upstream, its who
if you are searching for a "package replace" you need a real replace.
Audacious have the same interface "winamp-like", but, its a newer
package and have some missing features. But, we can you read on this
thread, the point isn't to make an remaked-xmms on audacious, its makes
users switch to another player.

And the main point its to deliver who client its the best for user
switch, and the porposed alternatives, audacious its the client with
more possibilities (because their interface, like xmms), but isn't
because their missing features.

At all, this is my opinion, an opinion of a "not really noob, but not
really advanced, too" user, who are using xmms from long ago. Really i
have "tested" some options, but this doesn't convince me. I'm an "not
really exigent user", but i find some functionality on a player who
audacious doesn't get me.

- --
er_maqui@darkbolt.net  ||  http://maqui.darkbolt.net
Linux registered user number: #363219
PGP key avaliable at KeyServ. KeyID: 0x4233E9F2
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Los hombres somos esclavos de la historia
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: