m. allan noah wrote: > it is important to remember that the developers of sane are volunteers > just like you. most of us got involved because we had a lame scanner too. > we probably dont have time for such evangelism.
But if someone was offering.... > that said, even if someone had the time to run around and convince vendors > of the merits of sane, there would be at least two recurring sentiments: > > 1. sane spec is not complete, cause it does not support various > LEDs,buttons or sensors that the manufacturers believe add so much value > (and brand distinction) to their products. Proposals to include this have been discussed, possibly input from a manufacture would help. > 2. they are going to want more control over the gui so they can do things > like show pictures and diagrams of the scanner, which means they are going > to write their own front-end half the time. > Or repackage existing - under GPL - is this a problem. > then, i as a developer, and hopefully you as an open-source/free software > user would have another complaint: > > 3. closed-source backends are much harder to debug/extend than free, even > if you have the vendor to complain to. > This is looking for problems, why assume they will be closed source. > that said, there are a couple vendors who do make backends (brother comes > to mind).
