ETAs for libusbx operability and first release?

[Pete Batard]

On 2012.01.30 16:46, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> Well, my problem here is that I've accumulated quite a few things that
>> I'd like to push,
>
> Yeah. Lucky for you libusb hasn't diverged much in the many months
> you've been waiting.

Actually it did. The removal of HID was a major PITA, since hotplug was 
based on code that had HID. I also haven't updated the hotplug branch 
for months, so there might be surprises.

>> and I don't know how you guys want to prioritize them.
>
> Neither do we until you present a list ;-) Let's do that after the
> 1.0.9 release though.

Agreed. We'll need to go back to stuff that was debated on the libusb 
list. I remember that topology and logging callback were discussed there 
(the first is currently in -pbatard). There's also cross platform event 
support for async that we should try to implement sooner rather than 
later. But the rest will need to be digged up.

> so we can make the 1.0.10 release the "big mswindows changes"
> release?

Thanks to Travis' good work, the libusbK and libusb-win32 integration 
shouldn't require that much of a major change actually, so, at least in 
terms of code, it may not be that spectacular. Should be a lot simpler 
than Graeme's proposal.

>> For instance, if you want a hotplug proposal right after the 1.0.9
>> release,
>
> I'd say hotplug is something for v2.

OK. I wasn't planning to push it for 1.0.10 anyway.

>> I can most certainly provide one. But that will push the
>> libusb-win32/libusbK integration back,
>
> I think it is best if you focus on this for .10 .

That's also my current plan, but it doesn't hurt making sure someone 
doesn't see it differently.

Regards,

/Pete