I think in a long run this is really good news. Now, what are your thoughts on interoperability of "old" libusb and "new" one? Will you try to have some sort of interoperability or are you planing to have 'clean slate' implementation (as far as I remember, fpusb was not very similar to libusb)?
On Jan 1, 2008, at 19:31 , Daniel Drake wrote: > Andrei Tchijov wrote: >> Libusb porting efforts were spearheaded by the fact that there are >> quite a few Linux apps which rely on this API. As of now fprint >> is the only app which rely on fpusb and even if this project will >> have supper well-received, it will take years to get to "critical >> mass" - when enough projects depend on it to justify someone >> porting it to Windows (or Solaris or AIX ) > > It might help things here or it might have no effect, however you'll > probably be interested to hear that I am now the lead developer of > libusb. fpusb will soon be renamed to libusb and later released as > libusb-1.0. > > The principles/goals behind fpusb nicely fit in with the original > ideas for libusb, so it makes sense for my work to become the future > libusb given the inactivity of that project. > > Maybe the size of the existing libusb community will help things > adoption- and porting- wise. > > Daniel _______________________________________________ fprint mailing list [email protected] http://lists.reactivated.net/mailman/listinfo/fprint
