On Sunday 03 June 2007 02:38:30 you wrote: > On 6/2/07, Ren? Rebe <rene at exactcode.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 02.06.2007, at 22:05, m. allan noah wrote: > > > > > On 6/2/07, Ren? Rebe <rene at exactcode.de> wrote: > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> On 02.06.2007, at 20:59, ?tienne Bersac wrote: > > >> > > >> > So what is the conclusion of the thread ? > > >> > > >> don't now. Response stopped. > > >> > > >> For me it means I'll have a private patch, probably inside the T2 > > >> SDE: > > >> > > >> http://www.t2-project.org/ > > >> > > >> I can not and will not spend 4 years of recoding SANE just for 2 new > > >> (missing) frame types. > > >> > > >> We need to get free software stable, solid and feature complete - not > > >> ever changing. > > >> > > >> I do not see any reason to drastically redo SANE just some people > > >> want too, and neither the free coding slaves to do that. There are > > >> not > > >> many reasons why the current SANE standard should be abondone. > > >> > > >> As far as I can see gradually enhancing it is way more doable and > > >> reasonable and also matches the available developer resources. > > >> > > > > > > i have spent some time looking at scanimage.c. i think the > > > modifications required to support the new frame types will be somewhat > > > more extensive than i had hoped, but it can be done. > > > > > > however, oliver's objections to API instability have resonated with > > > me, such that i am hesitant to commit this to sane cvs without a > > > little more discussion. yes, it could remain a private patch, but i > > > would like our work to reach the widest audience possible. > > > > > > i wonder if the best solution is a 'middle road' of starting iterative > > > development of sane2 based on current sane1. I know folks are hesitant > > > to begin without the draft spec completed, so maybe this idea is also > > > a non-starter. > > > > Thing is, Open Source does not work by sitting in a private round > > discussing for years - but by actually coding. > > i daresay everyone on this list agrees. > > > None of the successive projects starts programming "when some > > draft was done", but the Linux kernel, GNOME, KDE people just > > gradually code what is needed and makes sense. > > yes- but perhaps those are not the best examples, as linux has binary > incompatability as a goal :), and the other two are not a suite of > drivers with congruent interfaces like sane. they also have not been > stable for years the way sane has.
That is not exactly true. The user-land interface never changed. You can run 7 year old programs and libraries, even A.OUT ones , still. I'm out of office for the next weeks, so replays will not happen often. Cu, -- http://exactcode.de | http://t2-project.org | http://rene.rebe.name