On 2012.09.06 11:04, Hans de Goede wrote: > In the mean time if you're convinced that the libusb using application > part (so the external) API is solid, I'm fine with doing this for just > windows for now
I'm never convinced that anything I code is solid. Ever. That's why I subscribe to RERO. :) It's only when others start to use your code that you get hints about how solid it really is... I guess proposing the API+Windows patch for inclusion will depend on how much other stuff we have to deal with before RC. If it's likely we can use the extra breathing space, I'll delay it for 1.0.14, especially if you say you may have some room to look into it past mid October. Besides, I'm really not that hell bent on introducing API breakage, when there's a possibility Linux could require API adjustments. I'll also point to my previous post that highlighted a few things we might want to look into with regards to BOS/EP Comp: https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=4FCCA5E3.8080101%40akeo.ie&forum_name=libusbx-devel Regards, /Pete ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
