Hi,
On 05/19/2013 10:15 PM, Pete Batard wrote:
> On 2013.05.19 09:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> So I think it is best to just agree to disagree here.
>
> If I can't win support, yeah, I guess there's not much point pursuing
> this argument.
> Oh well, I did what I could to avoid us getting into t
On 2013.05.19 09:11, Hans de Goede wrote:
> I'm afraid you're not understanding here is caused by us just coming
> from a very different perspective, see my RHEL example above.
I could comment on that, since, while I'm happy to have you onboard (and
I do mean it), libusb/libusbx is not a project
On May 19, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> With some help from Pete, Xiaofan as well as Nathan, I have been working on
>> integrating the libusb hp API work done by Nathan for 1.0.16 on top of
>> libusbx.
>>
>> We
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 11:20:59AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> By the way, Greg, at what point does it make sense to move things from
> Documenation/ABI/testing to Documentation/ABI/stable? I get the
> impression that nothing ever makes this jump.
One people start relying on the file, it should
On Sun, 19 May 2013, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi, Greg, Alan, All,
>
> On 05/18/2013 06:17 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 12:14:08PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> On Sat, 18 May 2013, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>> But the sysfs descriptors file will just packs the
> >>> rawdescriptors
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> With some help from Pete, Xiaofan as well as Nathan, I have been working on
> integrating the libusb hp API work done by Nathan for 1.0.16 on top of
> libusbx.
>
> We're planning to push these changes to libusbx master by the end of the week
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With some help from Pete, Xiaofan as well as Nathan, I have been working on
> integrating the libusb hp API work done by Nathan for 1.0.16 on top of
> libusbx.
>
> We're planning to push these changes to libusbx master by the end
Hi Pete, All,
Pete, sorry for snipping away allmost everything here, this is not
because I'm not taking you serious, but because I largely agree. The only
contention point between us seems to be adding support for ep-comp-desc
to 1.x, see my other mail for that.
On 05/19/2013 04:06 AM, Pete Batar
Hi,
On 05/19/2013 04:06 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> On 2013.05.18 10:41, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> I disagree, just because we cannot have the perfect API, is not a very
>> valid reason to not add support for something, as long as we can do
>> so with a good enough API. To quote Torvalds:
>> "perfect i
