[sane-devel] sane-backends release 1.0.26 schedule

[Wilhelm]

Am 06.05.2017 um 14:27 schrieb m. allan noah:
> On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 5:52 AM, Louis Lagendijk <louis at fazant.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 08:04 -0400, m. allan noah wrote:
>>> Ok folks, it's time to get another sane-backends release out the
>>> door.
>>>
>>> Olaf has done a good job of cleaning up our contributors list and
>>> curating the bug tracker. However, there are a handful of patches in
>>> the bug tracker that could still be applied, once they are reviewed.
>>> Also, quite a number of backends that are now unmaintained. So, this
>>> is a good time to get involved with sane. If you benefit from this
>>> project, and have some programming experience, we could use the help.
>>>
>>> Schedule:
>>>
>>> May 7: Feature freeze (only fix bugs and update docs after this date)
>>> May 14: Code freeze (only update docs after this date)
>>> May 21: Release
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>> Yesterday when I had a look at our bug tracker for any issues in my
>> code I found https://alioth.debian.org/tracker/?func=detail&group_id=30
>> 186&aid=315004&atid=410366
>> This is an issue for scanbd integration that requires more flexibility
>> for configuration of dll-loading: when scanbd is used users need to use
>>  the net backend only, but scanbd/saned need to be fed with the
>> "normal" list of backends.
>> I made a patch to dll.c where
>> - It used the dll.conf with the name pointed out by env. var
>> SANE_CONFIG_FILE if defined, if not
>> - it tries to load a dll2.conf if it exists. This is meant to be a file
>> dropped in thre sane config dir by scanbd. If that does not exist
>> - it follows the existing code path.
>>
>> I added a #include statement in the config file so dll2.conf can
>> include dll.conf if so required.
>>
>> I am in the process of testing and cleaningup. but my question is:
>> should I commit this change so close to the freeze date? Documentation
>> is still to be done, but I would still have 2 weeks for that.
>> Alan, what do you think?
>>
> 
> I don't now recall the entire discussion around the guts of scanbd's
> implementation, but you description sounds a little odd to me.
> 
> 1. If dll2.conf is created by scanbd, and scanbd is not running, and
> the user uses scanimage or another frontend, he will unknowingly load
> dll2.conf first. Even if dll2.conf #includes dll.conf, it is still a
> behavior change.
> 2. Do you not also need changes to saned to make this work? That
> seemed to be the case in the earlier discussion.
> 3. I think I would prefer a more clear name than dll2.conf, but I
> cannot think of one :)

>From a scanbd point of view it would be suffcient to have either:

1) an env-var e.g. SANE_CONFIG_FILE which is normally unset and all
sane-applications use the compile-time setting. scanbd can set this to
an alternative (e.g. scanbd-dll.conf) file before starting saned.

2) give saned a -c <file> option

I would prefer 1)

Thanks for investigating on this ;.)

--
 Wilhelm