My point of view is that it is better to identify the problems you wish to solve my creating a new version of sane that the current version of sane can not be developed into.
The first problem I've noted with sane is that it is a little bit all mixed up, detection mixed with scaning, paraport mixed with usb. not good. If you are going to start a new direction and really give it some weight behind it I suggest the following: For device detection and management use HAL, update hal dbus code with all existing detection and status code which will keep these devices happy, enable the modification of the hal xml as a simple way of keeping track of which scanners work with which backends too, removing this from the backend code is a must. You can then change your clients to use hal and simply call dbus commands to scan etc. Paraport scanners need continued support, we don't just drop support because something better has come a long. we should try to work with the hal team and how their dealing with passive devices on para and serial ports, we might be able to come up with something good that allows the best combination of user selection and computer detection. For the drivers them sevles, obviously use of libusb is good, but the idea that libsane is a background package which doesn't offer anything it's self is quite desirable. giving distributers the option of installing some or all scanner backends. as long as device detection etc is handled by hal then it won't even be a problem to have sane request the right backend be installed upon use. You can tell I've given this a lot of thought, sane was going to be my next project to work on because I was sick to death of setting up scanners with it. On 12/17/06, Alessandro Zummo <azummo-li...@towertech.it> wrote: > On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:25:01 +0100 > Frank Zago <s...@zago.net> wrote: > > > > so you're saying to declare current sane as stable, > > > fork it and add features to the new tree, making > > > it "morphing" into something that will be the next sane? > > > > > Yes. I think sane1 can evolve into sane2 step by step so as to keep a > > working tree. > > well, I'm open to this possibility. I just need to > add a new sane frame format after all :) > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Alessandro Zummo, > Tower Technologies - Turin, Italy > > http://www.towertech.it > > > -- > sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel > Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject "unsubscribe your_password" > to sane-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org >
