[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Friday 15 December 2006 17:57, Alessandro Zummo wrote: Hello developers, since there seems to be interest in developing sane2, I've decided to start this thread in order to collect the commitment of each developer. I'm willing to port the epson driver to sane2, help porting the coolscan driver and handle the command line frontend. I think Giuseppe Sacco has showed interest to do coolscan bits. A friend of mine, Stefano Merlo, has committed himself to the canon driver. I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'll do the plustek stuff (maybe also plustek_pp and u12) If needed I'll also check the sanei_thread stuff. Regarding the plustek_pp: I don't think we should support parport devices any longer. One thing: I'd like to see Hennings opinion here! And we should agree on some version of the SANE2 standard... Ciao Gerhard
[sane-devel] [Patch][Resend] Native Win32 support
On Friday 15 December 2006 21:13, Ilia Sotnikov wrote: The patches against sane-backends CVS 12/08/2006, as well as against 1.0.18, just posted to SANE bug tracker: https://alioth.debian.org/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=304254group_id =30186atid=410366 Comments and critics are welcome. -- Ilia Sotnikov Thanks for that, but there's no need to send it twice. I've currently no comments on that - any other? Gerhard
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 12:49:04 +0100 (MET) Gerhard Jaeger gerh...@gjaeger.de wrote: I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'll do the plustek stuff (maybe also plustek_pp and u12) If needed I'll also check the sanei_thread stuff. great, thanks! Regarding the plustek_pp: I don't think we should support parport devices any longer. they are, in fact, kludgy. we might start without them. there's always the chance to add them if the need arises. One thing: I'd like to see Hennings opinion here! And we should me too! agree on some version of the SANE2 standard... when the dev team will be in place we might run a bunch of quick polls in order to make some fundamental choices (c99, data types, ...). -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy http://www.towertech.it
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Sunday 17 December 2006 15:02, Jochen Eisinger wrote: Hi, Alessandro Zummo wrote: I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'm quite surprised to hear there is a sane2 standard - at least one that we can easily start to implement. I don't think it's a good idea to start hacking something before it's clear we have a standard that will support us for the next few years. Hi, in general I'd say: yes you are right. But on the other hand I don't see any real progress since years regarding SANE2 - so the question is: Stay/stuck on SANE1 w/o any chance to enhance support for recent devices OR start with a standard that has not been finished yet... What needs to be done to finish the standard? Is anybody able to point out the open issues? -Gerhard
[sane-devel] aculaser cx11nf now works on sane via the network interface
the subject says it all, I just managed to obtain the first image with the epson2 driver. i need to clean up the code a bit and will commit it to the cvs soon. -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy http://www.towertech.it
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 15:02:19 +0100 Jochen Eisinger joc...@penguin-breeder.org wrote: Hi, Alessandro Zummo wrote: I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'm quite surprised to hear there is a sane2 standard - at least one that we can easily start to implement. I don't think it's a good idea to start hacking something before it's clear we have a standard that will support us for the next few years. you're right. my idea is to rally up some developers and then define the standard. only then we should start hacking. however, defining the standard without the developers will not lead us to anything useful. some people has committed the time necessary to port to sane2 the first bunch of drivers. we are currently missing coders for - all of sanei/* (i'll take sanei_tcp) - the build system (configure, makefile et al) - X11 frontends -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy http://www.towertech.it
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Alessandro Zummo wrote: On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 15:02:19 +0100 Jochen Eisinger joc...@penguin-breeder.org wrote: Hi, Alessandro Zummo wrote: I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'm quite surprised to hear there is a sane2 standard - at least one that we can easily start to implement. I don't think it's a good idea to start hacking something before it's clear we have a standard that will support us for the next few years. you're right. my idea is to rally up some developers and then define the standard. only then we should start hacking. however, defining the standard without the developers will not lead us to anything useful. some people has committed the time necessary to port to sane2 the first bunch of drivers. we are currently missing coders for - all of sanei/* (i'll take sanei_tcp) - the build system (configure, makefile et al) - X11 frontends I believe the right approach is to fork the existing tree and start fixing and adding functionalities to it. That way you'll keep something that works all the time, saving many headaches. As or for the sane2 standard, it's only just a piece of paper right now. Coding should determine what will stay and what will go away, not the opposite (cathedral vs bazaar). Frank.
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Alessandro Zummo wrote: Hello developers, since there seems to be interest in developing sane2, I've decided to start this thread in order to collect the commitment of each developer. I'm willing to port the epson driver to sane2, help porting the coolscan driver and handle the command line frontend. I think Giuseppe Sacco has showed interest to do coolscan bits. A friend of mine, Stefano Merlo, has committed himself to the canon driver. I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I can port mine. Frank.
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:33:51 +0100 Frank Zago fr...@zago.net wrote: some people has committed the time necessary to port to sane2 the first bunch of drivers. we are currently missing coders for - all of sanei/* (i'll take sanei_tcp) - the build system (configure, makefile et al) - X11 frontends I believe the right approach is to fork the existing tree and start fixing and adding functionalities to it. That way you'll keep something that works all the time, saving many headaches. As or for the sane2 standard, it's only just a piece of paper right now. Coding should determine what will stay and what will go away, not the opposite (cathedral vs bazaar). so you're saying to declare current sane as stable, fork it and add features to the new tree, making it morphing into something that will be the next sane? -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy http://www.towertech.it
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Alessandro Zummo wrote: On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:33:51 +0100 Frank Zago fr...@zago.net wrote: some people has committed the time necessary to port to sane2 the first bunch of drivers. we are currently missing coders for - all of sanei/* (i'll take sanei_tcp) - the build system (configure, makefile et al) - X11 frontends I believe the right approach is to fork the existing tree and start fixing and adding functionalities to it. That way you'll keep something that works all the time, saving many headaches. As or for the sane2 standard, it's only just a piece of paper right now. Coding should determine what will stay and what will go away, not the opposite (cathedral vs bazaar). so you're saying to declare current sane as stable, fork it and add features to the new tree, making it morphing into something that will be the next sane? Yes. I think sane1 can evolve into sane2 step by step so as to keep a working tree.
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:25:01 +0100 Frank Zago s...@zago.net wrote: so you're saying to declare current sane as stable, fork it and add features to the new tree, making it morphing into something that will be the next sane? Yes. I think sane1 can evolve into sane2 step by step so as to keep a working tree. well, I'm open to this possibility. I just need to add a new sane frame format after all :) -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy http://www.towertech.it
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
On Sun, 2006-12-17 at 19:37 +0100, Frank Zago wrote: Alessandro Zummo wrote: On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 15:02:19 +0100 Jochen Eisinger joc...@penguin-breeder.org wrote: Hi, Alessandro Zummo wrote: I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'm quite surprised to hear there is a sane2 standard - at least one that we can easily start to implement. I don't think it's a good idea to start hacking something before it's clear we have a standard that will support us for the next few years. you're right. my idea is to rally up some developers and then define the standard. only then we should start hacking. however, defining the standard without the developers will not lead us to anything useful. some people has committed the time necessary to port to sane2 the first bunch of drivers. we are currently missing coders for - all of sanei/* (i'll take sanei_tcp) - the build system (configure, makefile et al) - X11 frontends I believe the right approach is to fork the existing tree and start fixing and adding functionalities to it. That way you'll keep something that works all the time, saving many headaches. As or for the sane2 standard, it's only just a piece of paper right now. Coding should determine what will stay and what will go away, not the opposite (cathedral vs bazaar). Frank. One other step is to check which bugreports can be solved before such a fork. -- m.vr.gr. Gerard Klaver
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
My point of view is that it is better to identify the problems you wish to solve my creating a new version of sane that the current version of sane can not be developed into. The first problem I've noted with sane is that it is a little bit all mixed up, detection mixed with scaning, paraport mixed with usb. not good. If you are going to start a new direction and really give it some weight behind it I suggest the following: For device detection and management use HAL, update hal dbus code with all existing detection and status code which will keep these devices happy, enable the modification of the hal xml as a simple way of keeping track of which scanners work with which backends too, removing this from the backend code is a must. You can then change your clients to use hal and simply call dbus commands to scan etc. Paraport scanners need continued support, we don't just drop support because something better has come a long. we should try to work with the hal team and how their dealing with passive devices on para and serial ports, we might be able to come up with something good that allows the best combination of user selection and computer detection. For the drivers them sevles, obviously use of libusb is good, but the idea that libsane is a background package which doesn't offer anything it's self is quite desirable. giving distributers the option of installing some or all scanner backends. as long as device detection etc is handled by hal then it won't even be a problem to have sane request the right backend be installed upon use. You can tell I've given this a lot of thought, sane was going to be my next project to work on because I was sick to death of setting up scanners with it. On 12/17/06, Alessandro Zummo azummo-li...@towertech.it wrote: On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:25:01 +0100 Frank Zago s...@zago.net wrote: so you're saying to declare current sane as stable, fork it and add features to the new tree, making it morphing into something that will be the next sane? Yes. I think sane1 can evolve into sane2 step by step so as to keep a working tree. well, I'm open to this possibility. I just need to add a new sane frame format after all :) -- Best regards, Alessandro Zummo, Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy http://www.towertech.it -- sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject unsubscribe your_password to sane-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alessandro Zummo wrote: Hello developers, since there seems to be interest in developing sane2, I've decided to start this thread in order to collect the commitment of each developer. I'm willing to port the epson driver to sane2, help porting the coolscan driver and handle the command line frontend. I think Giuseppe Sacco has showed interest to do coolscan bits. A friend of mine, Stefano Merlo, has committed himself to the canon driver. I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) Just for everyone's info, the latest proposal for sane 2 (as far as I know) can be found here: http://www.sane-project.org/sane2/ (Dec. 8, 2002, has it been that long... :) ) Kind regards, Bertrik -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFhbSHETD6mlrWxPURAtDoAKC4A7tMaNMVZH8WFEeuJREfwP2hIgCgjuoL LzZ7FoobSmohsMGPFDIKt0M= =Yv0P -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Thanks for the link, See it sounds like you want to make the same mistakes, instead of looking for a better way to organise scanning in linux your looking at how to better organise functionality in sane. The problem is that the way scanning is organised is crack-pot and out dated. we are duplicating effort for no good reason other than to be stuck in our rut. I see so many opportunities to make sane a slim line routing code instead of a bloated detection and scanning library. On 12/17/06, Bertrik Sikken bert...@sikken.nl wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alessandro Zummo wrote: Hello developers, since there seems to be interest in developing sane2, I've decided to start this thread in order to collect the commitment of each developer. I'm willing to port the epson driver to sane2, help porting the coolscan driver and handle the command line frontend. I think Giuseppe Sacco has showed interest to do coolscan bits. A friend of mine, Stefano Merlo, has committed himself to the canon driver. I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) Just for everyone's info, the latest proposal for sane 2 (as far as I know) can be found here: http://www.sane-project.org/sane2/ (Dec. 8, 2002, has it been that long... :) ) Kind regards, Bertrik -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFhbSHETD6mlrWxPURAtDoAKC4A7tMaNMVZH8WFEeuJREfwP2hIgCgjuoL LzZ7FoobSmohsMGPFDIKt0M= =Yv0P -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject unsubscribe your_password to sane-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Hi, On 2006-12-17 16:43, Gerhard Jaeger wrote: in general I'd say: yes you are right. But on the other hand I don't see any real progress since years regarding SANE2 - so the question is: Stay/stuck on SANE1 w/o any chance to enhance support for recent devices OR start with a standard that has not been finished yet... There is no need to do it only one way. You could write a meta backend (like dll) that connects to a sane2 frontend and translates sane2 api to sane1 and loads sane1 backends. So you'd only update the maintained or new backends to sane2 and let the meta backend do the reast for the old ones. What needs to be done to finish the standard? Is anybody able to point out the open issues? http://www.sane-project.org/sane2/sane2-todo.html And more generally: http://www.sane-project.org/sane2/sane2-todo.html There is already a branch in CVS for SANE2 (see above), it has only the docs, no code yet. Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Hi, On 2006-12-17 12:49, Gerhard Jaeger wrote: One thing: I'd like to see Hennings opinion here! And we should agree on some version of the SANE2 standard... Unfortunately I'm very busy and can't do any work related to SANE2 in the near future. I'd really appreciate a new effort in this direction. However, please everybody read all the old threads about SANE2. There was already a lot of discussion and the details are NOT easy. So before everybody starts programming, at least the basic ideas of SANE2 should be fixed. Some points like the image formats and the error handling really need to be finally decided. Bye, Henning
[sane-devel] Problems in 1.0.18, sane_fujitsu, USB fi5120C.
Allen, m. allan noah wrote: On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Lonny Granstrom wrote: 2. Help messages for -x, -y, --pagewidth, --pageheight do NOT provide proper information, descriptions are all the same. what messages do they provide? my copy says: -x 0..224.846mm (in steps of 0.0211639) [215.872] Width of scan-area. -y 0..863.489mm (in steps of 0.0211639) [279.364] Height of scan-area. --pagewidth 0..224.846mm (in steps of 0.0211639) [215.872] Must be set properly to align scanning window --pageheight 0..863.489mm (in steps of 0.0211639) [279.364] Must be set properly to eject pages Help messaages match - but references to ADF use dropped. what does this mean, 'references dropped'? are you saying that these messages are ok afterall, or do you want the word 'ADF' in the last two? My understanding was FLATBED used -l,-t,-x,-y ADF used --pagewidth, --pageheight. Since you have unlocked scan-area/paper-size in .18 not sure where FLATBED or ADF references should be included now. (e.g., for ADF, both -l and -x MUST be used to properly mimic the missing --pagewidth argument) -l and -x are not the same as --pagewidth. the last tells the scanner the size of the paper so it can decide where the left margin on the adf is located. the other two set the location of the area that will be scanned. note that the pagewidth must be larger than the location you are trying to scan, or you will likely get an error. So this means what? The .17 command: scanadf -d device --pagewidth 100.0 --pageheight 60.0 that produced correct results, a scanned image from the ADF 100mm x 60mm automatically centered [matching adjustable paper guide movements], now should be the .18 command: scanadf -d device -l 62.4 -x 100.0 -y 60.0 to produce the same results? try: scanadf --pagewidth 100.0 --pageheight 60.0 -x 100.0 -y 60.0 The command worked. This behavior is confusing: 1. Cannot use defaults for the other arguments when using --pagewidth [Invalid Argument], but with -x it is recognized? 2. Using -y without --pageheight does lock both in fi5120C ADF. 3. Using -x --pagewidth in combination versus -l -x? Will dutifully pass all 4 arguments in .18. i guess that the 1.0.17 code must have locked the scan area to the size of the paper. i am not going to do that anymore, however, because some scanners (including yours) have overscan capability, where the scan area is a few mm larger than the paper on all sides. when combined with a black background, this makes deskew easier. RELATED: if I change the values to be EXACT: -? 60.0 = -? 59.9998 still get; scanimage:/scanadf: rounded value of br-? from 59.9998 to 59.9998 not sure about that. perhaps i am returning the wrong thing when the option gets set, i will look... allan -- Regards, Lonny L. Granstrom Binson's Home Health Care Centers t:586-755-2300 f:586-755-2322 MIS Department (ext: 3372) -- This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please destroy.
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Hi, Alessandro Zummo wrote: I'd appreciate if everyone who is interested can reply with their own commitments for the 2007.. ehm.. sane2 :) I'm quite surprised to hear there is a sane2 standard - at least one that we can easily start to implement. I don't think it's a good idea to start hacking something before it's clear we have a standard that will support us for the next few years. regards -- jochen
[sane-devel] SANE2 commitment
Hi everybody, On 2006-12-15 17:57, Alessandro Zummo wrote: since there seems to be interest in developing sane2, I've decided to start this thread in order to collect the commitment of each developer. [...] Could we please move the SANE2 (and any sane-standard related) topics to the sane-standard mailing list? That's the idea of that list ... SANE2 threads tend to create lot of traffic that is less interesting for users and even some programmers. So lets focus it in sane-standard. sane-standard is moderated to avoid off-topic. Frequent posters will be automatically moderated. Others may take one day time to be approved. More moderators for this and the other SANE mailing lists are wanted. Volunteers please contact me. Bye, Henning
