Re: Polypaudio action plan

[Seth Nickell <snickell redhat com>]

> Yes - the point I might have been making is that many
> distributions probably will stay with esound, even though GNOME
> "reccommends" a better alternative (and thus far, no-one has said
> that polypaudio is worse than esound, and lots of people have
> said it's better).

What I don't want is to include polypaudio in such a way that people
write directly to it (the same way as libgnome etc currently directly
use esound). As Colin proposed, requiring GNOME modules to use gstreamer
for sound (assuming that nothing needs direct/fast audio at the moment)
will allow us latitude to experiment with lower level solutions to
software mixing without tangling our apps up in a new sound API.

-Seth