On 18/02/2014 10:57, Andrew Shadura wrote: > Hello, > > On 18 February 2014 09:33, Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi> wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:09:11AM +0100, Andrew Shadura wrote: >>> Is it not? It's much more convenient than fighting with a broken audio >>> server which was written by a bunch of not really sane people suffering >>> from some extreme form of a NIH syndrome. > >> I think that attacking people isn't a good way to make one's point, or >> to foster a constructive discussion. It also makes me, and probably >> other people, feel uninterested in participating in any discussions on >> this and other Debian mailing lists. > > Sorry if that looked like an attack. Probably that was a very poor > choice of words. > > However, my point is still that I can't see how said server improves > the situation, my feeling is that it makes it only worse. > This is obviously a feeling. Facts would be better. Pulseaudio is not broken, not by large. Many linux users use it without any problems; it is default on almost all distributions, including the largest ones (Debian is the exception here). It may have bugs in specific cases of hardware, but this is not the pulseaudio maintainer/bug list address here. -- Jean-Christophe Dubacq
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature