On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, John Harvey wrote:
>>
>> I think this is something you first have to discuss with
>> upstream and get their go before publishing such modified
>> code and even packaging it for broader consuming. I'm sure
>> John, who's the maintainer of the xdriver will listen to any
>> suggestions you have.
>>
>> I'm not saying that the changes are bad. It is just not the
>> way oss works, unless you want to fork the project. If you
>> really want to fork then please use another versioning, the
>> current state will only confuse users. Otherwise please feed
>> this list with little patches that can be reviewed. Thanks.
>> --
>> Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
>>

After the discussion on the list last week, I was going to revert some 
of the changes I made to the code base so the amount of changes will 
actually be fairly minimal.

The summary of changes will be this:

*) the auto-tools stuff will be added
*) the end output will product ivtvdev_drv.so

My goal isn't to fork anything.  Just make things consistent with the rest 
of the world.

I should have these changes done last this week and posted again.  Until 
then, I wouldn't waste time reviewing anything.

-- 
//========================================================\\
||  D. Hageman                    <[email protected]>  ||
\\========================================================//

_______________________________________________
ivtv-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-devel

Reply via email to