On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Marc-André Lureau <mlur...@redhat.com>wrote:
> > > ----- Mensaje original ----- > > Thanks for the answer, Marc-Andr é ! > > > > I'll think about these areas of enhancements you've suggested. They need > a > > bit of clarification though - because it isn't clear for a newcomer what > and > > how to improve :) > > > > As for OS preferences, I'm a cross-platform guy, though giving a favor to > > Linux naturally. This may be considered as a minus as I'm used to > > cross-platform frameworks which do so much low-level work and hide > > OS-specifics behind nice interfaces... I want to mention that I'm used to > > C++, so getting in mostly C-written components would be harder for me. > What > > Spice parts are more C++-friendly actually? > > Iirc, the browser plugins (only XPI is public atm), and win-vdagent are > C++. > > The rest is in C. The Spice client is sharing 99% of the code, while the > platform-specific bits are handled at lower levels: gdk/cairo etc.. > The code is quite portable, thanks to libraries like GLib/GIO/Gtk+. > > But there are still platform-specific components that are not portable > (this situation could still be improved). > > > BTW, right now I've come across 2 tickets in the tracker: > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63807( No way to filter > > devices) and https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62033 ( Means > to > > detect local-only, and related > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62187 , > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62188 ). Are they relevant > to > > work on? I need an advice on how to actually fix them (I've added some > > initial suggestions/questions in comments). > > There is a lot of improvements possible for local-only, and this is very > relevant for desktop applications like Boxes. It is not so relevant for VDI > in general, so it's not highest priority. It's indeed a good bug to work on. > OK, I'm going to start with this one. As I understand, following changes are needed: 1. Add local/remote detection function to server code [based on what? compare own src IP address and dst of the client?] 2. Add new interface at vdagent level [How vdagent can/should provide this information to the user? what kind interface should be added? Shared library? Adding it only for this purpose doesn't seem to make sense; but if some other functionality is needed at the guest, it maybe a good way to do this...] 3. Add a communication between these new parts [guess it should be done via some virtual device; should this be a request from vdagent to server? Or notification from server?] > > Regarding USB filtering, the bug was has a solution and was reopened. > Imho, this is quite out of scope of Spice client libraries, so it should be > handled at a different level, either libusb* or in the application. > Probably in the application until a good API is found. > > OK... > > > > For my future work I'm thinking about particular features useful for > > enhancing VoIP clients performance/quality within VDI. One of them is > listed > > at the wiki, http://spice-space.org/page/Features/CodecPassthrough . > While > > it is useful(and probably should be done at first, or alongside), I think > > there are even better possibilities - when the traffic doesn't go to VM > at > > all. How to implement this - it is another question:) One of the most > > obvious ways is to implement something like 'remote media engine' > capability > > for spice client, and provide an API to apps running at guest via > extending > > vdagent. It should be easier for audio-only solution, for video-capable > > another level of integration would be needed, when this media engine > would > > be rendering video in the app-provided window from the guest... Some > sort of > > such 'window overlay' APIs are part of Citrix HDX and VMWare Horizon View > > suites actually. > > Do applications need to be aware of those API? Perhaps we could implement > that? Tbh, I think a Linux solution using GStreamer elements should work. > But adapting Windows directshow/media/whatever API to use that framework > under the hood might be difficult. We lack of Windows experience to tell > what is the best level or API to hook into. > > This API makes sense for VDI-only users, when the local system isn't used for anything except remote viewer (e.g. thin client). This is a common use case for enterprise VDI, and probably irrelevant for most non-enterprise users... I don't know what Windows framework would be the best for this task; afaik GStreamer is available for Windows as well. Also there is a cross-platform free/open-source media engine - Google WebRTC, specifically targeting VoIP communications - I think it should be considered too. -- Best regards, Fedor
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
