LinuxMusicians

Ok one more.

What if one would add more NSM functionality to the patchbay. What if I could launch a NSM client from let's say dmenu, it appears in the patchbay and from there I would be able to not only hide and show NSM clients, but also resume, stop and remove them (one has to think out how to display this visually). As I've my sessionlauncher already separated from my 'active session manager', such patchbay could act as my 'active session manager' instead.

I think Bespoke is showing me that such a patchbay centered way of working could work. It might remove some of the cognitive load to have the JACK connection stuff in the same place as managing the NSM clients.

Adding NSM support to Bespoke will be be the most logical and best step to integrate it in a NSM workflow, but who knows how these things can be combined in the future. Seeing what bespoke does, what this patchbay does, what carla can do...

Thinking about this, I see acceptance of arguments also as complicating in such a setup. Not completely comparable, but nobody seems to object to the fact that one can't add arguments when adding a plugin...

By the way, one other nice thing of RaySession/Patchbay is that it seems to function fine in a tiling WM like i3 or dmw.
If one is going to to write 'suckless audio rules' for standalone linux audio applications (that should have done 20 years ago, NON did parts of it), it should include this dwm rule:

A window should fit every size!

Not only positives about RaySession/Patchbay though, hit another bug, a crash in Patchance. I can imagine devs who have plans to do work on Patchance or with Pitchichi, wants to work with a stable foundation as much as possible.

According to houston444 it would be really bad if it can't save, but doesn't say why that is yet (standalone Patchance can't save anything either now I think)

There was a bug in Patchance git master that I just fixed, the bug made fail the recall of positions at startup (the bug was also affecting RaySession https://github.com/Houston4444/RaySession/issues/165), I just forgot to update HoustonPatchbay module in Patchance after fix.

Program arrange is something I started to work on, but anyway, there is no perfect way to arrange a canvas, some algorithms will be nice in some situations but not in others, and it also depends on user tasks. By experience of what I have written, it can be very nice to make more clear complex situations, but the best positions are often the ones the user choose.

Not only positives about RaySession/Patchbay though, hit another bug, a crash in Patchance. I can imagine devs who have plans to do work on Patchance or with Pitchichi, wants to work with a stable foundation as much as possible.

No program can warranty that no bug exists (even crashes). The most a program is used, the most bugs and crashes can be catch, under the condition you use the last release, and I am pretty sure you use the git master version. A such user behavior is already irritating when it comes from newbies, it is unbearable coming from someone in the party for years. Don't be surprised to feel austracised saying so enormous stupidities. You perfectly can say you meet a crash (and I trust you, that is not the problem), then the good behavior is to try to reproduce it, then report a bug, rather than saying "this program is not stable enough".

Program arrange is something I started to work on, but anyway, there is no perfect way to arrange a canvas, some algorithms will be nice in some situations but not in others, and it also depends on user tasks. By experience of what I have written, it can be very nice to make more clear complex situations, but the best positions are often the ones the user choose.

I'll keep an interested eye on it.

No program can warranty that no bug exists (even crashes). The most a program is used, the most bugs and crashes can be catch, under the condition you use the last release, and I am pretty sure you use the git master version. A such user behavior is already irritating when it comes from newbies, it is unbearable coming from someone in the party for years. Don't be surprised to feel austracised saying so enormous stupidities. You perfectly can say you meet a crash (and I trust you, that is not the problem), then the good behavior is to try to reproduce it, then report a bug, rather than saying "this program is not stable enough".

I think I said I couldn't judge from my limited experience. But you probably know as well that I mostly report bugs especially in the field of NSM, but reporting bugs often means you're expected to help debugging, which I do most of the time. This is time-consuming and keeps you away from using the program itself. So, now I try to do it only for programs I'm using myself, if I will use Patchance in my setup in the future and get hit by a bug, I'll report them. But avoiding bugs has also to do with code development. Ideally a program works like a real instrument probably. Limited features, no bugs. No judgement, but something which is part of the/ my search 'can such modular audio setup (using JACK) work and if so how'. The big negative for me is all the small bugs in the chain. Not saying that only a suckless/unix approach will work. Like I said, Bespoke is proving me the contrary already maybe.

On the other side, sure i can imagine now how hard it is to maintain such a project, which is far more (complicated) work then I've ever realized probably. Then you work hard on it, and you get such issue reporting in return. I understand that can suck about maintaining, especially if you do it for free.