On 13.2.2013 0.38, "Nathan Hjelm" <hje...@me.com> wrote: > >Using descriptions like "stupid" for the proposed event names does >nothing to advance the discussion on what the API for libusb 1.0 should >look like. You, and others, have been given (and still have for a short >time) an opportunity to help define the official hotplug interface for >the libusb 1.0 API.
Sorry about the choice of words, I should have chosen some euphemism. Nothing personal Nathan, I don't know you, so don't take it or this personally. I'm sure Pete did not take it personally when you abandoned libusbx and called the HID functionality crap. As to having the opportunity to help libusb API development I politely decline, I hope that libusbx will take it's own course and libusb can go wherever it's fancy takes it, if it is going anywhere, which was one of the problems in the first place. Since you are not interested in libusbx I would have not involved you in this discussion at all had not someone else done it and it is not my habbit to speak behind the backs of people so I kept you in the loop. br Kusti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013 and get the hardware for free! Learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
