On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 09:56:24AM -0700, Guy Harris wrote: > > On Jul 7, 2015, at 8:56 AM, Joerg Mayer <jma...@loplof.de> wrote: > > > While I understand the logic behind our argument, I don't agree with it: > > With the possibility of winpcap and npcap diverging, that may at one point > > in time mean diverging and incompatible APIs. Also, what happens if a user > > wants to use Wireshark with winpcap and also wants to use npcap? Does your > > proposal have a solution to this?
> I would hope that the long term plan is to incorporate NPcap's capabilities > into WinPcap, now that the WinPcap development process is being opened up. > That would presumably mean that, in the long term, there's only one library, > with one API. As long as that *is* the long term plan, then yes, this agrument is invalid and my objections should be ignored. Ciao Joerg -- Joerg Mayer <jma...@loplof.de> We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
