On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Pete Batard <p...@akeo.ie> wrote:
> On 2012.08.27 21:56, David Grant wrote:
> > We use Visual Studio 2008 here. Would a patch to add support for
> > Visual Studio 2008 support be accepted?
> >
> > Sorry, I should have said "considered" not "accepted"
>
> I guess you're only talking about the project files, which, apart from
> 2005+2008 mixup (will we need to duplicate the .vcproj in /msvc for 2005
> and 2008?) shouldn't be that different from the 2005 ones, right?
>
> Our reasoning so far has been that the VS2005 project files were just a
> short upgrade away for being turned into VS2008, and that we didn't want
> to multiply the solution files we would have to *maintain*, as ensuring
> that they work always is an effort we can't really commit time to
> ourselves.
> Now, the reason we also have the 2010 project files right now, is that
> this is what the Windows maintainers and testers primarily use, so
> maintaining those is a no brainer (it's actually maintaining the 2005
> solution files that has become an issue, since they are no longer
> actively tested). But I guess if we were to switch to 2012 tomorrow,
> we'd probably drop the 2010 files, as they can be produced from the 2005
> ones, and just keep a 2012 set along with the 2005 one.
>
> Thus, my caveat would be that, if we are to add the VS2008 project
> files, we will need someone to check on a regular basis that they are
> functional. And we have good reason to request that, as libusb actually
> went months with broken MSVC6 solution files before anybody complained,
> whereas the last thing we want is users getting a bad first impression
> due to broken project files. Of course, the expectation is that there
> shouldn't be much change, and hence not much to break if we add the 2008
> project files, but I would still have second thoughts about committing
> those unless we get a commitment from you or somebody else to ensure
> they are properly tested on regular basis.
>
> Also, be mindful that the multiplication of VS project files adds to the
> effort of Windows maintainers. Say, if we wanted to add a new source to
> the Windows backend, then that source will need to be added (and ideally
> tested for breakage) in 6 different development environment:
> Cygwin/Mingw (autotools), VS2010, VS2008, VS2005, MSVC6 and WDK => 6
> times more work and 6 times more possibilities to break something...
>
> So, to answer your question, unless we can count on you to test the
> VS2008 project files on regular basis, as well as submit fixes in case
> of breakage, there may be reservations to commit such files.
>
>
Thanks for the information. I agree, adding more VS project files is a bad
idea. And I can see why adding VS 2008 and removing 2005 support is a bad
idea since that screws over anyone who is stuck using VS 2005 still.
Thanks,
Dave
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
