ETAs for libusbx operability and first release?

[Segher Boessenkool]

>> b) I do not know what should
>> be in the release, no consensus was reached;
>
> Yes it was.
>
> The consensus was what you had in pu (proposed update),

I had nothing in there, it was plain libusb.git .

> which was based on the then current git.libusb.org, plus what  
> specifically asked I identified as needed on top of pu, which I did  
> provide to you right away at [1],

You had a git tree with some mswindows patches.  I couldn't apply
those as-is, since I would need to fix the commit messages.  When
I finally got myself to do that a few days later (I do not like
work, as I said before ;-) ), your tree was changed.  So I dropped
it.

> plus whatever you may subsequently want to add on your own (or  
> requested). As far as I am aware, since I did pick the patches from  
> Sean and Xiaofan that we identified on this list as "should have",

You shouldn't do that.

> there wasn't anything more that was identified as needed on the  
> mailing-list than what I provided in my pu branch.
>
> But for some reason, you appear to have missed some of my pu  
> commits, since you re-did the OS-X patches from Xiaofan, whereas I  
> had already added them (after fixing).

No I didn't.  What tree are you looking at?

> As I stated, as far as I'm concerned, I do not see the need to add  
> anything else for the time being, regardless of what libusb.org  
> does, since we should be able to easily catch up once we have the  
> first release.
>
> If we now estimate that, because of the release delay, we should  
> catch up, I can of course update my pu branch. But I'd rather make  
> sure that if I do that, you are actually going to see these commits  
> and also let me know whether you can work with them or not.

I'll go through whatever is on your branch now.

>> and c) the stuff
>> that you guys _do_ say should be in there is not in terribly
>> good shape, e.g. all the check-in comments in your tree (the
>> one that disappeared) need major work.
>
> As far as I can see, my pu branch is still very much publicly  
> accessible and has been so from day one. It also has not been  
> modified in any way.

$ git fetch pete
error: The requested URL returned error: 403 while accessing http:// 
github.com/pbatard/libusbx/info/refs

Huh.

Changing it to use git:// seems to work though (but it cannot clone
from that!  That is, when I added that remote it couldn't.  Now it
works.  Did github change something?  The https:// doesn't work
either, invalid certificate).

Anyway.  I can access your repo again now, I'll fix things up.


Segher