I don't see a problem there. When someone uses openusb as backend, then because it wants to use it and its features. When someone uses libusb as backend, then because it wants to use it and its features, and right there is pyUSB lacking right now. You don't give me the possibility to use my prefered lib in its full extend. Like I said: I could extend pyUSB and commit the changes if you want or I do my own fork and the man power gets spread again, like it happend with libusb and its 3,4 or 5 forks... Is latter an good option? I don't think so...
Best regards Stefano Am 25.10.2012 22:32, schrieb Wander Lairson Costa: > 2012/10/25 Stefano Di Martino <stefan...@gmx.net>: >> Yes, just for user info. I'm working on a home brew solution where I can >> switch on/off physical ports on an external usb hub. The user shall not >> only see the device name, but also the port number which the device is >> connected to. >> This is a home brew solution for the company I'm working for. >> It wouldn't be a big effort to implement this feature in pyusb, wouldn't it? >> > The point is not how hard is to implement it, the point is that it is > only available for libusb 1.0 and libusbx, what about other backends? > Bloating the backend API with library specific stuff is unhealthy IMO, > but I understand that users wish these features, and I have been > thinking on how to deal with it, but ir probably will occur only after > the (long awaited) 1.0 stable release... > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct _______________________________________________ pyusb-users mailing list pyusb-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyusb-users
