Le vendredi 10 mars 2006 à 10:18 +0100, Hans Verkuil a écrit : > So the situation is that 0.6 might work with 2.6.16, but I'm not sure. I'm > not going to spend time on it until 2.6.16 is released.
The situation would not even arise if ivtv was available as a kernel patch (meaning - building with normal kernel tools on vanilla kernel *not* custom tools on v4l cvs). That's the canonical kernel way and it is supported by Fedora (just drop the patch in the srpm as for example the wireless guys have been doing - the wireless tree didn't even exist when ivtv declared merging time!) If upstream merging continues to stall would it be possible to consider releases-as-kernel-patches? I hate to pull it on the table again, but I've been waiting for months for it to happen, and all the energy seems to be focused on supporting ancient kernel releases via all sorts of unholy workarounds. For the record, we're not all running a frozen RHL 7.0 kernel which can not be upgraded without replacing its whole v4l system. ivtv 0.5 seemed aimed square at kernel inclusion (in november 2005, 5 months ago, will we hit the half-year mark?) It quickly degenerated in some sort of 0.4 testing ground. (you'll note no 0.5.x version was ever released after the 12 november 2005) Maybe it's time to declare 0.4 is as good as it will get and focus on inclusion? There's a vicious circle where you focus on not breaking old releases, and as result new releases suck, people use old releases, which justifies your first point, and you end up in stagnation. Here. I'm done. Hope I won't resend something like this in a few months. I'm probably dead wrong about some things but that's how ivtv looks like from a bystander point of view. -- Nicolas Mailhot
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
_______________________________________________ ivtv-devel mailing list [email protected] http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-devel
