[sane-devel] SANE frozen in amber ?

[Olaf Meeuwissen]

Julien BLACHE <jb at jblache.org> writes:

> "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com> 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 external backends ...

> Or we just take the sane (yeah, right, can we change our project's
> name one of these days, too?) path and have only supported backends be
> part of the package for the next API revision, with other backends
> following suit later (or not).

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?

> That would maybe bring some more contributors, which can't be a bad
> thing, and it'd be honest about which backends are maintained and
> which aren't.

Releasing individual backends will do that too.

That said, just putting the unsupported backends on hold like Julien
suggests is already a big step forward.

Hope this helps,
-- 
Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2           FLOSS Engineer -- AVASYS Corporation
FSF Associate Member #1962               Help support software freedom
                 http://www.fsf.org/jf?referrer=1962