Oliver Rauch <Oliver.Rauch at Rauch-Domain.DE> wrote: Hi,
> into xsane. I know if I would continue the work for xsane in this case > then I would have to spend 99% of my programming time to answer > questions about incompatibilities and problems with the new > "1.1-standard". Would you care to explain why the addition of new frame types would create any such problems ? Because that's the only thing that has been discussed so far - no ABI changes, no new functions in the API, just new frame types. Other projects add things to their API all the time and it hasn't caused chaos yet. Why would that not be possible in SANE ? There's no reason why expending the API in a careful and controlled fashion would let to that kind of problems on your end. > In my opinion it is not fair to create so much problems for SANE1 > because you don`t like to spend some days to create SANE2 backends from > the SANE1 backends. For that you'll need to lay out the base of SANE2 first, and at least port the test backend and scanimage. Then we'll have some data and examples to start porting other backends and frontends. As it stands SANE2 is pure theory and until some work has started on implementing it, there's a potential for running into troubles and having to modify the current SANE2. And you want that to happen as early as possible if at all... JB. -- Julien BLACHE <http://www.jblache.org> <jb at jblache.org> GPG KeyID 0xF5D65169
