Comment 317 for bug 371897

(In reply to comment #211)
> The argument is that there is no evidence that winealsa cannot be improved
> sufficiently to work well with Pulse. Until such evidence is presented, a
> separate winepulse driver is unlikely to be considered.
This argument is about as much bs as possible.
1) noting seems to have moved forward in this direction although I remember various changelogs claiming better support for alsa-pulse in the changelog. So either it would be really hard to fix or the wine-alsa code is just too ugly to look at so nobody dares to touch it.
2) if your argumentation is true, why is there an wine-alsa in the first place? alsa also has a wrapper for OSS. has anybody ever "programmatically proven" that this is not compatible?
3) there is a perfectly working solution (for me) with a maintainer and everything. what more can an open-source project wish for?

> Wine was originally intended as a tool for porting win32 apps to unix-likes.
> Should we abandon libwine apps just because most people use Wine to run native
> win32 apps?
nobody said that, what's your point?