Julien BLACHE writes:
> "m. allan noah" wrote:
>
> [gah the mail was really for the list, sorry]
>
>> We can certainly open the API up for changes, but whoever wants to see
>> the change had better be prepared to go into every backend and add the
>> code...
That might be a bit problematic with
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:52:58 +0900
Olaf Meeuwissen wrote:
> Why do all 80 backends (as of 1.0.20) _have_ to be released together?
> Why do all backends that are at the correct API revision _have_ to be
> released together?
What happens if the API gets extended somehow? You take
them all off th
Alessandro Zummo wrote:
Hi,
>> Why do all 80 backends (as of 1.0.20) _have_ to be released together?
>> Why do all backends that are at the correct API revision _have_ to be
>> released together?
>
> What happens if the API gets extended somehow? You take
> them all off the list again and iter
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:35:55 +0200
Julien BLACHE wrote:
> > What happens if the API gets extended somehow? You take
> > them all off the list again and iterate?
>
> Yes, it becomes a mess for everybody when that happens.
>
> And it doesn't make sense anyway. What do we ship as sane-backends
> Recently I've seen Lido support added - for $80 for scanner it worth trying.
Thanks for that! I have a LiDE around, but for my application, a film
plane that's closer to 35mm film (or a bit larger) is ideal... using
the linear array from a CCD scanner directly is what I'd like to do.
> a frontend that asks for new, unsupported features, will simply
> get an appropriate error code.
Allen Noah, earlier in this thread (Thu Jun 11 19:08:28 UTC 2009) alluded
to the problem with this approach when he wrote:
>bah- then no front-end will use it, since it is not guaranteed to be
>ther
unfortunately, there is no way to know how wide the sensor array will
be without opening the machine. I think you should be prepared to buy
a couple different machines. craigslist or ebay might be helpful
there.
allan
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Daniel Reetz wrote:
>> Recently I've seen Lid
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Richard
Ryniker wrote:
>> a frontend that asks for new, unsupported features, will simply
>> get an appropriate error code.
>
> Allen Noah, earlier in this thread (Thu Jun 11 19:08:28 UTC 2009) alluded
> to the problem with this approach when he wrote:
>
>>bah- the
"m. allan noah" wrote:
> Seriously, we have to bump the major number on the soversion to do any
> changes. The only real question is what do we do with all the
> unmaintained backends?
We leave them behind for now, and we'll see later what to do about
them. In the meantime, maintainers can pop u
