> I don't quite understand your reasoning for not completing > the code consolidation.
Not so impatient. The perfect development model is small steps, frequent updates. If there is a bug in 2.5.N+1 and things work in 2.5.N and the change between them is a simple and obvious one, then it is very easy to find the typo and correct it. With large patches this continuity is lost. My patch removed 5% of the code in usb-storage. That suffices for a first step. > I'd also like to know that he _really_ intends to take the next few > steps. I outlined a few steps to come. Showed you the code for some. Every step is an improvement. Why don't I do more? Well, you are welcome to work yourself on the things you consider most urgent. > Other than that, the patch looks fine. But I'd really hate to introduce a > couple of new files only to have them removed later... so we should think > about where this is all going to end up _ahead_of_time_. Ah, this is going to end up in a beautiful USB subsystem, where all devices I possess really work, and nothing crashes if one inserts and removes a few devices a few times. Andries _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
