Re: [Libusb-devel] libusb-stuge.git broke cygwin compilation

[Pete B. <pb...@gm...>]

On 2010.12.02 01:56, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> I'm sure people other than me will point out why timing info in libusb
>> can be a boost to their troubleshooting. More often than once, I'm
>> annoyed at not having this information myself.
>
> I would think this would be trivial to add; but now I realise you don't
> want to print the time at the time you print it, but print the time that
> something happened.

Nah for now I think we'll just stick with the logging time. I think it 
should be fairly trivial too, but I don't think it's a good idea to add 
it before we've dealt with the existing backlog. Still, if you want 
something now, I can probably come up with something

>>>> libusb-win32
>>>
>>> Do you have that ready to merge?  In an acceptable state?
>>
>> As I already mentioned many times, I need the existing Windows affairs
>> to be resolved before I start looking into that.
>
> It just sounded like you expected the fully merged stuff to be in 1.0.9,
> that's why I asked.

To be frank, right now, I don't know what to expect of 1.0.9. Will it 
have MSVC project files? Will it have xusb? Will it have a def or 
something else? Will it have new enum? Can't tell until the patches 
submitted (or about to be resubmitted when the current commit breakdown 
exercise is complete) have been dealt with in an official manner.

>> Without Release Early, Release Often being adopted by libusb,
>
> What do you think a reasonable time between releases would be?  Six
> months?  Three months?  Whenever enough stuff piled up?

Last one no contest.

The reason I am so frustrated right now is that I feel I've done 
everything I could to make it easy for the maintainers to integrate the 
Windows backend. I originally proposed a MinGW only implementation with 
pthread-win32 and WinUSB only to keep things simple and easy on the 
maintainers, and I regularly (I think it's 6 times now) posted a 
complete batch of Windows integration patches to the list, only to have 
them fall flat (i.e. neither rejected or approved - just sitting in 
limbo until they became out of sync with any branch and obsolete). 
Result, we now have more 150 KB of new code between 1.0.8 and 1.0.9, and 
this puts a strain on everybody.

For a project the size of libusb, I'd say if you have more than 20 KB of 
new code, release, release, release!!!

Regards,

/Pete