On 2012.05.11 17:34, Tim Roberts wrote: > "Every imaginable way." I hope you have some clue to the size of the > can of worms you've opened up there.
Yes. It's called customer care, even if some may argue we don't have "customers" as such. As far as I'm concerned, "customers"/libusbx users are #1 on our agenda. Thus, if they suggest something _repeatedly_, as they have done here, we damn well better try to do something about it. > Whether you like the terminology or not, there ARE paths that people > want to follow that are wrong, either because they don't fully > understand the technology, or they don't understand the implications of > their actions, or they have a flawed mental model of the system. *WRONG* There is what doesn't work (on a technical/demonstrative level , i.e. "it breaks" or "it doesn't return the expected result"). There is what works. There is what works better. Something that works and can be improved is not "wrong". It simply can be improved. Else, I would say we are surrounded by software that is indeed very, very "wrong". > I > think you're doing a disservice to people by reinforcing a defective > mental model, instead of "guiding" them to a correct and sustainable > solution. Does this mean there exists "ultimate" solutions that can not be improved on? Or that there are solutions that one can safely say will never revert part of what they implement? I think veteran software developers should have some idea how much the software landscape does change and how the "correct and sustainable solution" from yesterday may be seen in a completely different light tomorrow. As to defective mental model, when the majority seems to want to use a specific approach, I don't think treating it that way is very constructive. > What does the "topology" concept mean in a VM environment? Whatever a virtual port or a virtual hub or a virtual anything is supposed to be defined as, by the people who implemented the virtualization. But even if it doesn't mean anything, are you arguing that we should drop the whole concept of topology because there is a small area where it wouldn't apply? Isn't that similar to dropping WinUSB on Windows because, while it would help people who don't care about isochronous, it cannot do isochronous? > You're depending on interfaces that are system-specific but not promised > by contract. Are you sure the mechanisms you need will still be there > in three years? No (and not only because I sure hope we'll have overhauled enumeration in 3 years time). In 3 years time, I hope I'll still be listening to what users of libusbx want, on a day to day basis, and that the result of that will be that any required changes have been anticipated from either their requests or their known usage, with the implementation of a solution that "works better" and that addresses any of the deviations that are almost impossible to predict in advance. Regards, /Pete ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
