Hi Pete.
On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 17:07:42 +, Pete Batard wrote:
> I, and many others, happen to think users of libusb deserve more than
> one release in 4 years, even more so as continuous major development has
> been going on.
I disagree.
If libusb works fine, no need to fix bugs that are not present.
If the USB standard does not change, no need to change the library.
Since libusb is a core library, I find it much more important that it stays
reliable.
Each time there is a non-bugfix change to a library, there is a risk of
introducing new bugs.
I'd personally prefer stable quality code over code that has features added
every day.
OpenOCD is a good example; it's been an open wound for a while, but the current
developers are very serious and focus on fixing bugs, rather than adding new
features. In my opinion, that's the right way to go.
So I'd prefer that if there's a version of the USB library the has to be
changed often, that it would have a different name; it would be fine to keep
the name libusbx for this purpose, so that the name libusb would not deviate
from it's previous stable reputation.
Love
Jens
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
