Comment 402 for bug 371897

(In reply to comment #296)
> You want sources? kernel.org has them. Pulseaudio does not provide kernel audio
> drivers, nor does it interface directly with those drivers (by userspace libs).
> It must therefore use a backend, and on Linux systems ALSA is by far the
> dominant backend (driver and libasound/alsalib/whatever included). The only
> other serious contender for audio backend on Linux is OSS4, but that cannot be
> included in kernel upstream for licensing issues. And as pulse is OPTIONAL
> software (just as Wine, Xorg, GNU tools etc. are) and is not installed on EVERY
> Linux system, ALSA is irrefutably more common than Pulseaudio.

Ok. You have convinced us that it would not be good to remove ALSA drivers from Wine. Which has absolutely nothing to do with the current bug.

> > In the meantime, WinePulse is the currently-available solution that offers a
> > superior end-user experience.
>
> Tough. It cannot be included in Wine as the audio subsystem is going through an
> overhaul.

Says who? You are just arrogantly stating that as a matter of fact, hoping that it would make it a fact. It is not. It is just your private opinion not based in anything else. It is not even based on any argumentation. You are just stating that pulse can not be included because wine will not accept it, despite all facts and despite any and all argument that might have been raised.

Congratulations on killing free software as much as you can. I hope they pay you well at M$.

'Tough.' is not an acceptable answer. It was not acceptable a year ago and it even less acceptable now. If you can not get the new sound system working in a year, what chances are that you will ever make it work? Especially when you are so hostile to all your potential and actual contributors?