HID re-integration (was Re: ETAs for libusbx operability and first release?)

[Pete Batard]

Oh right, I wanted to reply to this too:

On 2012.01.31 02:11, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> I would like to have HID back. HIDAPI is good. However, it will probably
> not have hotplug feature anytime soon. And libusb-1.0 with Windows
> HID backend should still be good for quite some users. And when it
> gains hotplug feature, then it has at least one advantage against HIDAPI.

I'd like to have it back too, obviously, since my thinking is we're an 
USB library, not an USB-except-HID library. If it's USB, and we can 
handle it, we should try to handle it period. Yeah, I'm aware that HID 
has been reused for PCI, so technically, one could say it's not a subset 
of USB, but seriously, 99% of HID devices out there are USB so I don't 
think we should kid ourselves.

> Nathan was against the idea of an native HID backend for Mac OS X
> so probably it will not happen for Mac OS X.

Now, I would very much prefer to reinstate HID if HID was also going to 
be supported on OS-X, for the reason exposed above. If Nathan doesn't 
want to do it, I don't mind taking a stab at it (especially as it'll 
give me a good excuse to play with OS X development), but I can't vouch 
for how long it might take.

> But I understand that this should be post 1.0.9 release. So we can
> discuss this after 1.0.9 release.

Well, if we are to reinstate HID, I'd like to do so before we add 
libusb-win32/libusbK support, as it'll be easier to do it that way.

I'm relatively confident that I can do both if 1.0.10 happens about 2 
months after 1.0.9. If it's sooner than that, something may have to be 
left out.

Regards,

/Pete