Julian Scheel wrote: > Michael, > > On Monday 15 September 2008 17:42:06 Michael Krufky wrote: > > In summary, the bottom line is this: > > > > Manu did a great job with the multiproto API, people were happy using > > it, and all of the LinuxDVB developer community was happy with the > > work that was done, and we all wanted to merge it ~ two years ago. > > > > Back then, Manu said that it wasnt ready, so for some time we waited > > for him in hopes that he would agree that it was ready for merge. > > > > As more months went by, Manu was asked if he would be merging his > > changes, and he kept answering to the effect of "it's not ready yet, > > but should be in a few weeks" > > > > Months and months and months went by since then, with an occasional > > ping to Manu, with the reply "not ready yet" ... > > > > Two years is a very long time to wait for a new API, especially > > considering that it was functional from the start. It was looking > > like Manu may not have had any intention at all to merge his work into > > the master v4l/dvb development repository -- It should be not be > > surprising at all that Steven Toth felt the need to come up with his > > own solution. > > > > Steven posted a proposal for his API expansion solution, and he > > received positive feedback. Immediately, Manu broke out of his > > silence and sent in a pull request. > > > > > > Is there malice here?? No. There is development, and developers > > looking to move forward. Nobody is at fault. > > > > > > I have posted the above just to clarify what the "politics" actually > > are, here. The only real politics going around are those that are > > accusing others of politics themselves. > > > > Had Manu been willing to merge his work earlier, this would have all > > been a non-issue. However, now there is an alternative proposal on > > the table, which appears to be more robust and may have more potential > > that the multiproto proposal. > > > > Does that mean multiproto is disqualified? Absolutely not. > > > > Does the fact that multiproto was there first mean that it will be > > merged without question now that it is suddenly available? No, not > > necessarily. > > > > What does it mean? It means that now there are two proposals on the > > table. Two ways to solve a problem using different ideas and methods. > > > > The end users that have piped into the discussion are mostly concerned > > with which API demonstration repository already contains support for > > their device. This should have no bearing whatsoever on the decision > > of the linuxDVB API extension. All drivers will be ported to > > whichever solution is decided upon. > > > > Now is the time to examine these solutions from a developer point of > > view, in terms of how this affects kernel developers and application > > developers alike. There is no reason to rush into things just because > > a pull request has been made -- the outcome of this decision is highly > > important, and we will have to live with the decision for a good long > > time. > > Thanks for your version of the history. I just have to say I can't really > agree with the way you describe the history. To point this out I looked up > some of the old threads... > > So everything started in 2005 with initial proposals for a DVB-S2 extension of > the API by Marcel. In early 2006 there were some discussions about it on the > lists: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/23914/focus=24030 > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/24239 > > At that thought not much (if any) capable hardware was available, so the idea > was put off for the moment. > Then in April 2006 Manu started to work at the things and provided a first > draft based on the changes from Marcel: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/25401 > > An initial driver for KNC cards was provided by Manu based on this API > proposal. After some discussions on 05 May 2006 Manu requested for a pull of > the API: > http://www.linuxtv.org/pipermail/v4l-dvb-maintainer/2006-May/001006.html > > Immediately followed by Johannes stating that he is not satisfied with the API > yet and suggested a rework: > http://www.linuxtv.org/pipermail/v4l-dvb-maintainer/2006-May/001007.html > > At that time rework began while in parallel some people (including jusst > technologies) started testing the first drivers. As expected they were still > far away from running perfect. > > So it took a while to come to obvious progress. In January 2007 Manu announced > the mp-stb0899-c5 tree - not even the current multiproto tree - which included > the results of the rework. Some testing was done on that by more people. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/31146/focus=31159 > > In February Steven came up with initial support for HVR 4000 in the multiproto > tree. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/31605/focus=31644 > > Furthermore at this time the dvb-apps (at least parts of) were started to be > extended by multiproto support, so that more people (which do not write their > own applications...) could start testing. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/31726/focus=31729 > > In March Steven asked for the status of multiproto. Manu noted that the API > should be fine, but also asked Steve to look into dvb_frontend where Manu was > not sure of not having introduced new issues. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/31938/focus=32144 > > End of May 2007 still problems in dvb-core, which were related to the new API > came up and were fixed: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/33893 > > Then in Sept 2007 discussions came up how to integrate the multiproto API, > doing this as experimental or non-experimental. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/36082/focus=36411 > > In Oct 2007 Steven abandons his support for multiproto, due to delays caused > by several reasons. Political, surely also personal, but also technical. > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/36583/focus=36670 > > At the same time some more sophisticated DVB-S2 featues were requestes by the > users: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/36785/focus=36789 > > Finally in Nov 2007 Oliver did a full review of the new code, which was > necessary for merging. Still he asked for more reviewers. > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/37665 > > In January 2008 another user-initialised thread came up: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.dvb/38529/focus=38544 > Still testing is obviously needed as bugs still come up. > > In Apr 2008 VDR announced support for multiproto tree, so that more testing > can be done by many users. > > End of May Manu left for travelling and personal stuff until August, just with > short breaks apllying some minor patches. Still some users report issues with > multiproro, which were not fully taken care of. > > After his vacation Manu came back on this topic and did another shot at a pull > request. > > --- > > So this is how I see the history. Still 2 years is a very long time, but > everyone should keep in mind that introduction of DVB-S2 support has been > (still is) a big task with many problems. At first of course it is a big API > extension, which is always problematic. > Furthermore it is an API extension for a hardware which still is not spread > too widely and especially was not spread in 2006. And even those who had > proper cards for receiving DVB-S2 still were not able to make any use out of > the received data. To properly do testing at user side it was really necessary > to at least have a way to watch some of the distributed content, just to be > sure it is working well. > This was not possible for a long time due to lacing features in ffmpeg and > missing alternatives. Still I think the only really working way is using a > binary Windows codec named CoreAVC. > > Keeping all this in mind two years are not too long in my eyes. > > So this are just my 2 cents on this topic. All that I am interested in is a > properly working API with wide application and driver support. Which proposal > ever fits better - but decided on a technical base and not on historical or > personal terms. > > Regards, > Julian Thanks for the detailed (and imho correct) description of the history. CU Oliver -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- VDR Remote Plugin 0.4.0: http://www.escape-edv.de/endriss/vdr/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
