On 02/17/2012 10:58 PM, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote: > Let us take two examples to see how OpenSC can be improved: 1) The > ePass2003 code was reviewed by Viktor and included in his branch. You > probably did not know, did not compile, did not test and therefore > Viktor's work is ignored. He needs and deserves write access to > OpenSC main GIT to speed up development. The reasons is that we need > more new features, more beta testers.
[disclaimer I'm not experienced with opensc internals and comment might be wrong] This sounds pretty similar to the situation in hardware drivers which often evolve faster than the linux kernel's pace. It might be better to have a module approach for such development so that cutting edge drivers can be used with opensc without recompilation or waiting for a new opensc release. I don't know though, whether the size of the projectjustifies something like that. > 2) Take the example of Alon developments around PKCS#11. A lot of > them were ignored by OpenSSH. The reason is that when a small number > of people have a grasp on a project, strange things sometimes happen. > I would not like this to happen with OpenSC. Locking a project to a > small number of developers is not good. In cases it might be good. We rejected Alon's PKCS #11 patches on gnutls as well. You can say it was the wrong decision or so, but in the end of day the few developers responsible for the project will have to maintain it. If it is code they cannot maintain, or does not agree with the longer term plans of the project maybe the feature should be postponed. regards, Nikos _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
