Yes - it really would be great to see ivtv in the kernel tree. I totally agree with Aran on appreciating all the good work - I think getting officially supported would be a well deserved reward!
But (there is alway a 'but', isn't it) IMHO the PVR-350 TV-Out features have proven not to be as flawlessly as the encoder support on PVR-250 et al. So it might be a good idea to have the decoder features marked experimental and to explicitly enable these on demand. My $0.02, Martin > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aran Cox > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 6:59 PM > To: ivtv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [ivtv-devel] ivtv success, thanks, other details > > Firstly, ivtv has been working so well for me for so long now > I stopped reading the list. 0.3.2q has worked flawlessly for > me more or less since it came out with 2 PVR-250's on a > Via(!) motherboard. So flawlessly that I forget ivtv ever > gave me any problems at all. > (Various previous versions had worked flawlessly as well, but > changing kernel versions, changing hardware configurations, > etc. forced me to try newer versions which didn't always work > so flawlessly ;)). I recently went back to using the Axel > (atrpms) packages and as a consequence switched to 0.3.5l. > It also works flawlessly (thus far.) > > I subscribed to ivtv-devel in Nov 2003, I have ~50 versions > of ivtv on my system. From then to present I've totally > appreciated the amount of work that went into making these > cards work, so I'm here to say thanks! Particularly to Chris > Kennedy, but I realize that plenty of other people have > donated their time and resources to get ivtv to where it is. > In that vain, I made a (small) donation to the paypal account > (finally.) I know that it doesn't come anywhere close to > paying for the amount of time and effort invested, but take > it for what it's worth. > > Finally, I know that active development continues on ivtv but > isn't it time someone tries to convince the kernel people to > take it into the mainline kernel? As a convenience for users > it would be great to see it in a mainline kernel, or even the > -mm branch. Perhaps there are some technical issues > (conflicts with other v4l stuff?) or political issues that > I'm not aware of but basically a GPL'ed driver this useful > just plain deserves to be in the kernel, IMHO. (Perhaps I > missed previous discussions on this, I did try to scan the > list before I posted this, didn't see anything.) > > Thanks again, > Aran > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration > Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, > straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get > everything you need to get up to speed, fast. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click > _______________________________________________ > ivtv-devel mailing list > ivtv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ivtv-devel > > ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ ivtv-devel mailing list ivtv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ivtv-devel
