Comment 218 for bug 371897

(In reply to comment #111)
> (In reply to comment #110)
> > Pulseaudio provides what is desired by users, so a suggestion to just disable
> > it to run Wine is likely to be greeted just like a suggestion to just disable X
> > and run Wine in a framebuffer.
>
> I don't follow the logic

That is obvious. A new technology comes along that is by many account better than the one before it and that build upon the previous technology. And instead of supporting the new technology directly you demand that users disable the new technology to use your software.

> > PulseAudio works just fine.
>
> No it doesn't. If it did, we wouldn't need a discussion on the best way to
> improve Pulseaudio support in Wine.

Pulseaudio works just fine. Wine is the one that fails to provide support for pulseaudio.

> > It has far less bugs than ESD had when driver for
> > it was introduced into Wine.
>
> Difference is that ESD and Arts daemons did not provide an ALSA compatibility
> layer. Pulseaudio does, but it doesn't suit Wine's current needs.

So, Pulseaudio is being penalized befause it is better??? You are getting ridiculous here.

> > > And "a few milliseconds" is much more significant
> > > than you may think, especially when it's adding to already existing latency
> > > issues (which is the current problem with winealsa and plug pulse).
> >
> > And if that is so, then no pro-gamer would choose Wine anyway, so why cater to
> > them?
>
> Who said anything about GAMING?

Please read back the bug thread your are replying to (starting with comment number 4 and 7). All specific examples related to latency mentioned here were about gaming, first-person shooters to be exact. If you want to provide another example where overhead of Pulseaudio would be significant, please provide examples with testable use cases.

> > I *advocate* that both bugs - the wishlist bug of a new driver for pulse and a
> > bug that wine uses nonsafe ALSA API should be fixed.
>
> This is no longer a considered a "wishlist for driver" bug; it is considered to
> be for improvement of winealsa to talk to Pulse better.

You can consider it what you want. The bug is a feature request for adding a PulseAudio output driver to Wine and nothing else. Restricting Wine's ALSA driver to the safe subset of the API is a separate bug that has nothing to do with this one ( http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18740 ).

I will stop replying to you comments now, because you have not provided a single logical objection to Pulseaudio output driver besides 'I am too lazy to potentially have to look at it at some point later on'.