Re: very significant merge in ardour git repository

On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 09:48:43AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Fons Adriaensen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > So that means that you would connect a track input to e.g.
> > 'input 17' using Ardours's connection dialog, instead of
> > having a 'port' with a dedicated name (the track's name) ?
> >
> 
> Nope. There are no changes (so far) to the semantics of ports and wiring
> arising from this change. The goal was to make "native" audio I/O possible
> (i.e. non-JACK), not to alter the basic port model that Ardour has
> inherited from JACK (and that in some senses JACK originally inherited from
> Ardour).

The context of my question above, which maybe wasn't clear, is 
'when not using Jack, but a native interface, if and when that
will be possible'.

In that case e.g. a track input is not visible as as named port
outside ardour, so the only option seems to connect it from
within.

If that is possibe, then the same thing could be done with a set
of pre-existing, general-purpose Jack ports, instead of dynamically
creating ad-hoc ones. 

Ciao,

-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)