well, i might have broken the rules a bit, but i went ahead and added the backend. so far, this has been the only perk of the job :)
allan On 1/17/08, m. allan noah <kitno455 at gmail.com> wrote: > On 1/16/08, Alessandro Zummo <azummo-lists at towertech.it> wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:41:15 -0500 > > "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > we are in feature freeze for the pending release now, so it's too late > > > to get it in sane, unless we are willing to let the release date slip. > > > Since we anticipate more regular releases in the future, i am inclined > > > to hold off on this until next time. comments from other devels? > > > > > > well, given that is a whole new backend, and for a single model, > > even if it doesn't work, it shouldn't alter the stability of other parts > > of SANE. > > > > I'd include it, having it in the wild would lead to more bug reports > > than within the development cvs, where maybe there is no-one with that > > scanner model. > > the patch does apply cleanly, and builds with far few errors than most > other sane backends, so it is perhaps reasonable to include it. the > only thing i see strange about it, is that it does not use DBG macro > at all. perhaps the backend is perfect, and therefor does not need > debugging output, but our users systems can be messed up in odd ways > which can be quickly solved with a little debugging. > > Couriousous- are you up for adding some DBG calls (look at any other > backend for examples) > > allan > -- > "The truth is an offense, but not a sin" > -- "The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
