Ludovic Rousseau wrote: > > Ludovic made it clear that he does not want to cooperate. So I > > guess the initiative is rejected and dropped.
Hold on a moment. > The problem is that I do not have an unlimited amount of time. I > prefer to slowly improve pcsc-lite step-by-step rather than start a > new project from scratch. Please clarify this. I don't think you are saying that you will never ever let go of pcsc-lite. Would you be interested in working in a new project if and when another codebase offers interesting possibilities, and even phase out pcsc-lite in favor of the new, compatible, project? Likewise, Alon, please clarify what you request of Ludovic. I think it is unrealistic to ask him to both keep working on pcsc-lite _and_ invest a lot of time in building something new. I do not think you expect this from him? Long term I want the system outlined by Alon. Short term pcsc-lite requires maintenance. This is open source software, I care more about improving design than about releasing tomorrow. For me, it's fine if the right<tm> solution isn't available until in two years. If there are businesses or developers out there who need open source smart card support for new hardware, and noone knows OpenSC, maybe they can help by investing a little in the new system, so it will be finished quicker. It is not our responsibility as volunteers to deliver a working product at the cost of our sanity. It is our responsibility to apply the most of our ability and create stellar technology that will serve users well once it is working. Unless someone is paying there is no deadline. > > I am considering, just for fun, to add slot event reporting into > > OpenCT and add PC/SC compliant interface that uses OpenCT API. It > > is not the framework I outlined, but it will take us much closer > > to what we need. > > You want to start a competing PC/SC library? Do you think that will > simplify the live of normal users to have two PC/SC frameworks? Please Dr Rousseau, what kind of territorial statement is that? > If nobody invests in OpenSC internals knowledge the new cards will > not be supported and European citizens will not have free software > solution to use their cards. I think that is irrelevant. It is not the job of volunteers to provide software for Europeans, or anyone else. We should all work on what we believe does the most good. We are too knowledgeable to waste our time and our lives on discussion that leads nowhere. All of us. > pcsc-lite is (well) maintained. OpenSC is on the decline. You > should know what to work on if you want to help support of smart > cards in free software project. Again that seems territorial.. I have to say I'm surprised. :\ Ludovic, I completely understand that you feel unable to contribute much to a new project while still maintaining pcsc-lite as you do now. But would you refuse to cooperate with the project (share knowledge and code) if it was there, and do you refuse to find a way to migrate away from pcsc-lite in the long term? Alon, of course you don't want to write the whole thing all on your own. I think Ludovic and everyone else will help the project if it is there, but maybe he won't do it by sending patches. I know I will try to help the project. I don't regularly use cards anymore, but I have some hardware around here. I could start again. :) //Peter _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
