Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > So the question is: Wouldn't it be best to concentrate on > > improving the pcsc daemon instead of maintaining multiple > > other frameworks? > > Maintaining multiple frameworks is not an option. > pcscd needs revolution in order to support what I require and also > what you wrote bellow.
I agree completely with Alon. While pcsc-lite works well in many cases it doesn't cover them all, and the proposed new abstraction makes a lot of sense. I too came to the conclusion that a "revolution" would be neccessary in smart card land when I started learning about OpenSC. Andreas and I discussed this quite a bit at 23C3 IIRC. :) But I never came as far as Alon with writing it up. I think Alon's idea is really quite nice, and I hope that Ludovic and everyone else thinks so too. When it comes to how the actual implementation should be carried out, what should be done in which order and so on, I believe that is not as important as the fact that everyone agrees on which direction to go. :) Incremental changes of pcsc-lite or clean start are both possible scenarios and they both have strong benefits. Maybe some work will actually be duplicated temporarily along the way, but in the end I believe this will come out beautifully, as long as we can agree that it is something we all want to pursue. Thanks! //Peter _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
