Hi Pete. On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 17:07:42 +0000, Pete Batard wrote: > I, and many others, happen to think users of libusb deserve more than > one release in 4 years, even more so as continuous major development has > been going on.
I disagree. If libusb works fine, no need to fix bugs that are not present. If the USB standard does not change, no need to change the library. Since libusb is a core library, I find it much more important that it stays reliable. Each time there is a non-bugfix change to a library, there is a risk of introducing new bugs. I'd personally prefer stable quality code over code that has features added every day. OpenOCD is a good example; it's been an open wound for a while, but the current developers are very serious and focus on fixing bugs, rather than adding new features. In my opinion, that's the right way to go. So I'd prefer that if there's a version of the USB library the has to be changed often, that it would have a different name; it would be fine to keep the name libusbx for this purpose, so that the name libusb would not deviate from it's previous stable reputation. Love Jens -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
