Moving Sound into Core

Christopher Stafford ukdrizzle at
Sun Jun 17 17:11:55 EDT 2007

Casey Harkins wrote:
> Mark Doliner wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 19:41:04 -0500, Richard Laager wrote
>>> On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 19:32 -0500, Casey Harkins wrote:
>>>> If this approach were used, what do people think about *removing* sound 
>>>> from core (moving the small bits directly into gtksound.c or finch's 
>>>> equivalent)?
>>> Without thinking about this a ton or seeing an implementation, I 
>>> think it'd probably be okay.
>> But then you lose the ability for the core or a core plugin to play a sound
>> using purple_sound_play_file().  Would you actually gain anything by this
>> change?  It seems like you'd just be shuffling code around.
> A quick grep on libpurple/ shows nothing using it right now. I'm not 
> sure what 3rd party core plugins might be using it though. I think the 
> gain is eliminating an unnecessary layer of abstraction. From what I 
> understand, Adium is not using the sound ui_ops from libpurple. Finch is 
> already duplicating most of the gtksound.c, so there is little advantage 
>   for the abstraction there either.
> The ability for core plugins to play sounds would be lost though.
> What I didn't consider is what impact this might have on the VV work in 
> the future. If it requires some sort of audio abstraction in core, then 
> removing it before then would be silly.
The msn extras patch I wrote (can't remember the branch it's sitting in)
uses it it play voice clips. although that could be done through the UI
I guess there's a benefit in being able to target any UI that can play
sound easily rather than just doing Pidgin.


More information about the Devel mailing list