Joerg Wunsch wrote:
As David Brown wrote:
One thing I'd like to suggest is that the "library" be divided into
separate areas. In particular, I'd like to see a "stable" area and
a "staging" or "experimental" area.
I don't mind that, just one remark: unless you got lots of people who
are eager to test it, there's some risk with that approach that most
users will never test the "experimental" part until it is finally
tagged "stable".
That's certainly a risk - there are limitless projects stuck in "alpha
test" phase or called "test" for this reason. Perhaps there should be a
rough time limit - anything that remains in "experimental" with a stable
API for more than 6 months goes to a vote. Either people are happy with
it and it becomes "stable", or no one is interested in it and it gets
chucked out.
What I want to avoid here is that someone contributes code for a great
SPI driver, people start using it, and then someone else points out that
some AVRs have more than one SPI bus and the entire API needs to be
changed to take that into account. You end up with a choice of annoying
people by changing the API regularly, or annoying people by using an API
that doesn't cover the requirements just to avoid changes. Basically, I
want to make it perfectly clear to users when they can expect an API to
be stable and when it might change.
_______________________________________________
AVR-libc-dev mailing list
AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
