[linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[Sacha]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 502 bytes --]

Following your discussion from an end-user point of viwer I must say
that I wholy agree with this statement:
<But 2 years to get a new API is really too much. And during these 2
years, 2 

<different trees for 2 differents drivers was totally insane. We
(applications 

<devs) are always making our best to bring DVB to users as easily as
possible. 

<And trust me, the multiproto story has complicated users life A LOT.
This must NEVER happen again.

We, end-users want our stuff working now!

 

KR


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1434 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 150 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[VDR User]

2008/9/25 Sacha <sacha@hemmail.se>:
> Following your discussion from an end-user point of viwer I must say that I
> wholy agree with this statement:
>
> <But 2 years to get a new API is really too much. And during these 2 years,
> 2
>
> <different trees for 2 differents drivers was totally insane. We
> (applications
>
> <devs) are always making our best to bring DVB to users as easily as
> possible.
>
> <And trust me, the multiproto story has complicated users life A LOT. This
> must NEVER happen again.
>
> We, end-users want our stuff working now!

I assume you'd also like something that is well-designed, tested, and
stable rather then slapped together and rushed...  But you know what
they say about assumptions!

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[Jörg Knitter]

VDR User wrote:
> 2008/9/25 Sacha <sacha@hemmail.se>:
>   
>> Following your discussion from an end-user point of viwer I must say that I
>> wholy agree with this statement:
>>
>> <But 2 years to get a new API is really too much. And during these 2 years,
>> 2
>>
>> <different trees for 2 differents drivers was totally insane. We
>> (applications
>>
>> <devs) are always making our best to bring DVB to users as easily as
>> possible.
>>
>> <And trust me, the multiproto story has complicated users life A LOT. This
>> must NEVER happen again.
>>
>> We, end-users want our stuff working now!
>>     
>
> I assume you'd also like something that is well-designed, tested, and
> stable rather then slapped together and rushed...  But you know what
> they say about assumptions!
>   

I have to agree with the claim Sacha said.

I am also "just" an end-user, got a TT3200 with VDR 1.7 working with all 
the guides and even wrote an article on it. But it was and is still a 
pain - for 2 years now.

With the introduction of the alternative S2API I was hoping that this 
long wait is over after waiting endlessly after the announcement, 
multiproto is ready "in a few weeks".

I have followed the discussion all the two (?) years, and I did just 
filter out information about, when the API could be ready, and I was 
shocked by all the really bad personal attacks that happened last year 
(or the year before) and the splits that results now in four 
"repositories" (kernel, multiproto, hvr4000-stuff and mcentral), often 
with dozens of patches postet here or at vdrportal that need to be 
applied to get a DVB card running.

And the main reasons for this is not really technical, it seems to me 
that they are personal. Open source projects claim to be better than 
commercial products, but the things that happened and currently happen 
are a good reason to see also the disadvantage of community development.

I understand all sides:
1) Manu does not want to to give up his work that he worked for long 2 
years.
2) Markus Rechberger also did a lot of work, but I remember him to be 
very insulting to other developers - and quite uncooperative by starting 
his own tree. Linux development with MCC as leader might indeed be hard 
;)...
3) The S2API guys are fed up with all the waiting. Maybe there is indeed 
no technical reason behind the decision for S2API as I am also wondering 
why there is no answer to THE question. But waiting endlessly really is 
no solution...

The situation I see can not be solved by endless discussion, and even if 
MCC would switch to multiproto (again), there discussion would continue 
endlessly.

I just see two options to get a fair decision:
1) Allowing both APIs exist parallel for a short time and see who is the 
winner (as mentioned).
2) Let the community decide (all interested developers and even 
end-users like me and Sacha) with some kind of online vote. Communicate 
clearly before which "important" developer favours which API. As none of 
the API seems to have a real advantage/disadvantage, users like me will 
have to vote for both or decide on personal taste ;)

I favour option 2) as I also don´t like applications that rely on 
certain hardware (if only one API is supported).

With kind regards

Joerg Knitter

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[Markus Rechberger]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Jörg Knitter <joerg.knitter@gmx.de> wrote:
> VDR User wrote:
>> 2008/9/25 Sacha <sacha@hemmail.se>:
>>
>>> Following your discussion from an end-user point of viwer I must say that I
>>> wholy agree with this statement:
>>>
>>> <But 2 years to get a new API is really too much. And during these 2 years,
>>> 2
>>>
>>> <different trees for 2 differents drivers was totally insane. We
>>> (applications
>>>
>>> <devs) are always making our best to bring DVB to users as easily as
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> <And trust me, the multiproto story has complicated users life A LOT. This
>>> must NEVER happen again.
>>>
>>> We, end-users want our stuff working now!
>>>
>>
>> I assume you'd also like something that is well-designed, tested, and
>> stable rather then slapped together and rushed...  But you know what
>> they say about assumptions!
>>
>
> I have to agree with the claim Sacha said.
>
> I am also "just" an end-user, got a TT3200 with VDR 1.7 working with all
> the guides and even wrote an article on it. But it was and is still a
> pain - for 2 years now.
>
> With the introduction of the alternative S2API I was hoping that this
> long wait is over after waiting endlessly after the announcement,
> multiproto is ready "in a few weeks".
>
> I have followed the discussion all the two (?) years, and I did just
> filter out information about, when the API could be ready, and I was
> shocked by all the really bad personal attacks that happened last year
> (or the year before) and the splits that results now in four
> "repositories" (kernel, multiproto, hvr4000-stuff and mcentral), often
> with dozens of patches postet here or at vdrportal that need to be
> applied to get a DVB card running.
>
> And the main reasons for this is not really technical, it seems to me
> that they are personal. Open source projects claim to be better than
> commercial products, but the things that happened and currently happen
> are a good reason to see also the disadvantage of community development.
>
> I understand all sides:
> 1) Manu does not want to to give up his work that he worked for long 2
> years.
> 2) Markus Rechberger also did a lot of work, but I remember him to be
> very insulting to other developers - and quite uncooperative by starting
> his own tree. Linux development with MCC as leader might indeed be hard
> ;)...

just a small side note here, uncooperative because people wanted me to go into
a definitely wrong direction back then knowledge was limited by both
parties (this
is the final truth of it back then).
On the other side it was the uncooperativeness and dumping of alot
code and issues
which have been solved back then already with the help of a lot people.
I don't bother anymore I found other ways to have everything be
possible to coexist
in the kernel, and I actually prefer this coexisting solution now
which also provides
full support and even has a higher backward compatibility than the
things which got
pushed through back in time.

I'd rather prefer to forget about what happened here because it's a
full mess caused
by several people with limited knowledge years ago and todays position
about it is totally
different.
You can also find patched enduser applications on mcentral.de which can be used
with other devices and provide extra features which are required in
order to get devices
work properly.
There's gqradio patched to support lirc and digital audio
automatically, same with vlc and tvtime
(the last one also having different video output plugins which allow
software rendering if xvideo
hardware acceleration isn't available.

Still one fact till now is that not all devices which have worked in
v4l-dvb-experimental back in time
are now supported by v4l-dvb on linuxtv.org and nor all the em28xx
based devices are yet in the
em28xx-new tree, whereas the second one is the result of heavy
refactoring and better manufacturer
support for some back then reverse engineered components (-which is
good that they got replaced in order
to raise the signal strength).

Markus

> 3) The S2API guys are fed up with all the waiting. Maybe there is indeed
> no technical reason behind the decision for S2API as I am also wondering
> why there is no answer to THE question. But waiting endlessly really is
> no solution...
>
> The situation I see can not be solved by endless discussion, and even if
> MCC would switch to multiproto (again), there discussion would continue
> endlessly.
>
> I just see two options to get a fair decision:
> 1) Allowing both APIs exist parallel for a short time and see who is the
> winner (as mentioned).
> 2) Let the community decide (all interested developers and even
> end-users like me and Sacha) with some kind of online vote. Communicate
> clearly before which "important" developer favours which API. As none of
> the API seems to have a real advantage/disadvantage, users like me will
> have to vote for both or decide on personal taste ;)
>
> I favour option 2) as I also don´t like applications that rely on
> certain hardware (if only one API is supported).
>
> With kind regards
>
> Joerg Knitter
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
>

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[Halim Sahin]

Markus, 
Go on and ask the distributors to package your userspace stuff!
In fact nobody wants patched applications.
standardversion shipped with their distros will be prefered.



On Do, Sep 25, 2008 at 07:44:29 +0200, Markus Rechberger wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Jörg Knitter <joerg.knitter@gmx.de> wrote:
> > VDR User wrote:
> >> 2008/9/25 Sacha <sacha@hemmail.se>:
> >>
> >>> Following your discussion from an end-user point of viwer I must say that I
> >>> wholy agree with this statement:
> >>>
> >>> <But 2 years to get a new API is really too much. And during these 2 years,
> >>> 2
> >>>
> >>> <different trees for 2 differents drivers was totally insane. We
> >>> (applications
> >>>
> >>> <devs) are always making our best to bring DVB to users as easily as
> >>> possible.
> >>>
> >>> <And trust me, the multiproto story has complicated users life A LOT. This
> >>> must NEVER happen again.
> >>>
> >>> We, end-users want our stuff working now!
> >>>
> >>
> >> I assume you'd also like something that is well-designed, tested, and
> >> stable rather then slapped together and rushed...  But you know what
> >> they say about assumptions!
> >>
> >
> > I have to agree with the claim Sacha said.
> >
> > I am also "just" an end-user, got a TT3200 with VDR 1.7 working with all
> > the guides and even wrote an article on it. But it was and is still a
> > pain - for 2 years now.
> >
> > With the introduction of the alternative S2API I was hoping that this
> > long wait is over after waiting endlessly after the announcement,
> > multiproto is ready "in a few weeks".
> >
> > I have followed the discussion all the two (?) years, and I did just
> > filter out information about, when the API could be ready, and I was
> > shocked by all the really bad personal attacks that happened last year
> > (or the year before) and the splits that results now in four
> > "repositories" (kernel, multiproto, hvr4000-stuff and mcentral), often
> > with dozens of patches postet here or at vdrportal that need to be
> > applied to get a DVB card running.
> >
> > And the main reasons for this is not really technical, it seems to me
> > that they are personal. Open source projects claim to be better than
> > commercial products, but the things that happened and currently happen
> > are a good reason to see also the disadvantage of community development.
> >
> > I understand all sides:
> > 1) Manu does not want to to give up his work that he worked for long 2
> > years.
> > 2) Markus Rechberger also did a lot of work, but I remember him to be
> > very insulting to other developers - and quite uncooperative by starting
> > his own tree. Linux development with MCC as leader might indeed be hard
> > ;)...
> 
> just a small side note here, uncooperative because people wanted me to go into
> a definitely wrong direction back then knowledge was limited by both
> parties (this
> is the final truth of it back then).
> On the other side it was the uncooperativeness and dumping of alot
> code and issues
> which have been solved back then already with the help of a lot people.
> I don't bother anymore I found other ways to have everything be
> possible to coexist
> in the kernel, and I actually prefer this coexisting solution now
> which also provides
> full support and even has a higher backward compatibility than the
> things which got
> pushed through back in time.
> 
> I'd rather prefer to forget about what happened here because it's a
> full mess caused
> by several people with limited knowledge years ago and todays position
> about it is totally
> different.
> You can also find patched enduser applications on mcentral.de which can be used
> with other devices and provide extra features which are required in
> order to get devices
> work properly.
> There's gqradio patched to support lirc and digital audio
> automatically, same with vlc and tvtime
> (the last one also having different video output plugins which allow
> software rendering if xvideo
> hardware acceleration isn't available.
> 
> Still one fact till now is that not all devices which have worked in
> v4l-dvb-experimental back in time
> are now supported by v4l-dvb on linuxtv.org and nor all the em28xx
> based devices are yet in the
> em28xx-new tree, whereas the second one is the result of heavy
> refactoring and better manufacturer
> support for some back then reverse engineered components (-which is
> good that they got replaced in order
> to raise the signal strength).
> 
> Markus
> 
> > 3) The S2API guys are fed up with all the waiting. Maybe there is indeed
> > no technical reason behind the decision for S2API as I am also wondering
> > why there is no answer to THE question. But waiting endlessly really is
> > no solution...
> >
> > The situation I see can not be solved by endless discussion, and even if
> > MCC would switch to multiproto (again), there discussion would continue
> > endlessly.
> >
> > I just see two options to get a fair decision:
> > 1) Allowing both APIs exist parallel for a short time and see who is the
> > winner (as mentioned).
> > 2) Let the community decide (all interested developers and even
> > end-users like me and Sacha) with some kind of online vote. Communicate
> > clearly before which "important" developer favours which API. As none of
> > the API seems to have a real advantage/disadvantage, users like me will
> > have to vote for both or decide on personal taste ;)
> >
> > I favour option 2) as I also don´t like applications that rely on
> > certain hardware (if only one API is supported).
> >
> > With kind regards
> >
> > Joerg Knitter
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-dvb mailing list
> > linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
Halim Sahin
E-Mail:				
halim.sahin (at) t-online.de

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[Markus Rechberger]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Halim Sahin <halim.sahin@t-online.de> wrote:
> Markus,
> Go on and ask the distributors to package your userspace stuff!

this has been gone for a long time already, development went into
another direction form months already.

-Markus

> In fact nobody wants patched applications.
> standardversion shipped with their distros will be prefered.
>
>
>
> On Do, Sep 25, 2008 at 07:44:29 +0200, Markus Rechberger wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Jörg Knitter <joerg.knitter@gmx.de> wrote:
>> > VDR User wrote:
>> >> 2008/9/25 Sacha <sacha@hemmail.se>:
>> >>
>> >>> Following your discussion from an end-user point of viwer I must say that I
>> >>> wholy agree with this statement:
>> >>>
>> >>> <But 2 years to get a new API is really too much. And during these 2 years,
>> >>> 2
>> >>>
>> >>> <different trees for 2 differents drivers was totally insane. We
>> >>> (applications
>> >>>
>> >>> <devs) are always making our best to bring DVB to users as easily as
>> >>> possible.
>> >>>
>> >>> <And trust me, the multiproto story has complicated users life A LOT. This
>> >>> must NEVER happen again.
>> >>>
>> >>> We, end-users want our stuff working now!
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I assume you'd also like something that is well-designed, tested, and
>> >> stable rather then slapped together and rushed...  But you know what
>> >> they say about assumptions!
>> >>
>> >
>> > I have to agree with the claim Sacha said.
>> >
>> > I am also "just" an end-user, got a TT3200 with VDR 1.7 working with all
>> > the guides and even wrote an article on it. But it was and is still a
>> > pain - for 2 years now.
>> >
>> > With the introduction of the alternative S2API I was hoping that this
>> > long wait is over after waiting endlessly after the announcement,
>> > multiproto is ready "in a few weeks".
>> >
>> > I have followed the discussion all the two (?) years, and I did just
>> > filter out information about, when the API could be ready, and I was
>> > shocked by all the really bad personal attacks that happened last year
>> > (or the year before) and the splits that results now in four
>> > "repositories" (kernel, multiproto, hvr4000-stuff and mcentral), often
>> > with dozens of patches postet here or at vdrportal that need to be
>> > applied to get a DVB card running.
>> >
>> > And the main reasons for this is not really technical, it seems to me
>> > that they are personal. Open source projects claim to be better than
>> > commercial products, but the things that happened and currently happen
>> > are a good reason to see also the disadvantage of community development.
>> >
>> > I understand all sides:
>> > 1) Manu does not want to to give up his work that he worked for long 2
>> > years.
>> > 2) Markus Rechberger also did a lot of work, but I remember him to be
>> > very insulting to other developers - and quite uncooperative by starting
>> > his own tree. Linux development with MCC as leader might indeed be hard
>> > ;)...
>>
>> just a small side note here, uncooperative because people wanted me to go into
>> a definitely wrong direction back then knowledge was limited by both
>> parties (this
>> is the final truth of it back then).
>> On the other side it was the uncooperativeness and dumping of alot
>> code and issues
>> which have been solved back then already with the help of a lot people.
>> I don't bother anymore I found other ways to have everything be
>> possible to coexist
>> in the kernel, and I actually prefer this coexisting solution now
>> which also provides
>> full support and even has a higher backward compatibility than the
>> things which got
>> pushed through back in time.
>>
>> I'd rather prefer to forget about what happened here because it's a
>> full mess caused
>> by several people with limited knowledge years ago and todays position
>> about it is totally
>> different.
>> You can also find patched enduser applications on mcentral.de which can be used
>> with other devices and provide extra features which are required in
>> order to get devices
>> work properly.
>> There's gqradio patched to support lirc and digital audio
>> automatically, same with vlc and tvtime
>> (the last one also having different video output plugins which allow
>> software rendering if xvideo
>> hardware acceleration isn't available.
>>
>> Still one fact till now is that not all devices which have worked in
>> v4l-dvb-experimental back in time
>> are now supported by v4l-dvb on linuxtv.org and nor all the em28xx
>> based devices are yet in the
>> em28xx-new tree, whereas the second one is the result of heavy
>> refactoring and better manufacturer
>> support for some back then reverse engineered components (-which is
>> good that they got replaced in order
>> to raise the signal strength).
>>
>> Markus
>>
>> > 3) The S2API guys are fed up with all the waiting. Maybe there is indeed
>> > no technical reason behind the decision for S2API as I am also wondering
>> > why there is no answer to THE question. But waiting endlessly really is
>> > no solution...
>> >
>> > The situation I see can not be solved by endless discussion, and even if
>> > MCC would switch to multiproto (again), there discussion would continue
>> > endlessly.
>> >
>> > I just see two options to get a fair decision:
>> > 1) Allowing both APIs exist parallel for a short time and see who is the
>> > winner (as mentioned).
>> > 2) Let the community decide (all interested developers and even
>> > end-users like me and Sacha) with some kind of online vote. Communicate
>> > clearly before which "important" developer favours which API. As none of
>> > the API seems to have a real advantage/disadvantage, users like me will
>> > have to vote for both or decide on personal taste ;)
>> >
>> > I favour option 2) as I also don´t like applications that rely on
>> > certain hardware (if only one API is supported).
>> >
>> > With kind regards
>> >
>> > Joerg Knitter
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > linux-dvb mailing list
>> > linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
>> > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-dvb mailing list
>> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
>> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
> Halim Sahin
> E-Mail:
> halim.sahin (at) t-online.de
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
>

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[VDR User]

Another option would be to look at both proposals, take the best ideas
for each, and marry them into a new hybrid proposal so-to-speak.  By
that I don't mean something which must be built completely from the
ground up..  Most of the work has already been done.  I think that is
a workable solution that can be found somewhere in the middle.

And one thing is certain, Mauro should be replaced by someone more
competent.  When a CEO does what he has done, they get thrown out on
their ass or put in jail.  Something to think about when considering
his obvious failure as a leader.

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Jörg Knitter]

VDR User wrote:
> Another option would be to look at both proposals, take the best ideas
> for each, and marry them into a new hybrid proposal so-to-speak.  By
> that I don't mean something which must be built completely from the
> ground up..  Most of the work has already been done.  I think that is
> a workable solution that can be found somewhere in the middle.
>   
Thinking about all the posts within the last days, I did not propose 
something as this as I don´t believe that certain persons are still 
willing to cooperate or change their point of view. To be more precise: 
I think it would be a wonder if Steven Toth and Manu Abraham worked 
together. ;)

With kind regards

Joerg Knitter

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Michael Krufky]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Jörg Knitter <joerg.knitter@gmx.de> wrote:
> VDR User wrote:
>> Another option would be to look at both proposals, take the best ideas
>> for each, and marry them into a new hybrid proposal so-to-speak.  By
>> that I don't mean something which must be built completely from the
>> ground up..  Most of the work has already been done.  I think that is
>> a workable solution that can be found somewhere in the middle.
>>
> Thinking about all the posts within the last days, I did not propose
> something as this as I don´t believe that certain persons are still
> willing to cooperate or change their point of view. To be more precise:
> I think it would be a wonder if Steven Toth and Manu Abraham worked
> together. ;)
>
> With kind regards

For the record, Manu did a great job with Multiproto.  Steve worked
with the multiproto API and added driver support for his devices.
Steve depended on Multiproto in order for his devices to work.  Steve
asked Manu when he would merge into the master branch, and waited
patiently for months.  Manu wouldn't even merge Steve's drivers into
Manu's own multiproto tree.  After repeatedly asking him to merge with
no sign of progress, Steve was left in a tough spot and had to come up
with his own solution.

There is a saying that goes often for Linux development... "release
early, release often" ..  I first heard this saying from Johannes.  If
you dont go by this way of thinking, ie:  hold on to code for two and
a half years without allowing a merge, there is no guarantee that
somebody else may come up with a better solution.

There was no sign that Multiproto would _ever_ get merged.  All of us
have waited for two and a half years for this.  The FIRST pull request
from Manu only appeared after Steve posted his own API proposal.  Had
Manu requested merge but one day before that, it would have been
merged and that would have been the end of it.

As it turns out, Steve's API is more flexible, and allows us to
support more features than Multiproto allows.  If Manu would have
allowed Multiproto to have been merged into the master branch, Steve
would never have designed this newer API.  Due to the superior design,
that was the chosen extension.  This is where we are left today.

I hope that clears things up.

Regards,

Mike

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Markus Rechberger]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Michael Krufky <mkrufky@linuxtv.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Jörg Knitter <joerg.knitter@gmx.de> wrote:
>> VDR User wrote:
>>> Another option would be to look at both proposals, take the best ideas
>>> for each, and marry them into a new hybrid proposal so-to-speak.  By
>>> that I don't mean something which must be built completely from the
>>> ground up..  Most of the work has already been done.  I think that is
>>> a workable solution that can be found somewhere in the middle.
>>>
>> Thinking about all the posts within the last days, I did not propose
>> something as this as I don´t believe that certain persons are still
>> willing to cooperate or change their point of view. To be more precise:
>> I think it would be a wonder if Steven Toth and Manu Abraham worked
>> together. ;)
>>
>> With kind regards
>
> For the record, Manu did a great job with Multiproto.  Steve worked
> with the multiproto API and added driver support for his devices.
> Steve depended on Multiproto in order for his devices to work.  Steve
> asked Manu when he would merge into the master branch, and waited
> patiently for months.  Manu wouldn't even merge Steve's drivers into
> Manu's own multiproto tree.  After repeatedly asking him to merge with
> no sign of progress, Steve was left in a tough spot and had to come up
> with his own solution.
>
> There is a saying that goes often for Linux development... "release
> early, release often" ..  I first heard this saying from Johannes.  If
> you dont go by this way of thinking, ie:  hold on to code for two and
> a half years without allowing a merge, there is no guarantee that
> somebody else may come up with a better solution.
>
> There was no sign that Multiproto would _ever_ get merged.  All of us
> have waited for two and a half years for this.  The FIRST pull request
> from Manu only appeared after Steve posted his own API proposal.  Had
> Manu requested merge but one day before that, it would have been
> merged and that would have been the end of it.
>
> As it turns out, Steve's API is more flexible, and allows us to
> support more features than Multiproto allows.  If Manu would have
> allowed Multiproto to have been merged into the master branch, Steve
> would never have designed this newer API.  Due to the superior design,
> that was the chosen extension.  This is where we are left today.
>
> I hope that clears things up.
>

Julian put together a history (just because Michael keeps writing the same):
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/19/67

Markus

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[hermann pitton]

Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 23:00 +0200 schrieb Markus Rechberger:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Michael Krufky <mkrufky@linuxtv.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Jörg Knitter <joerg.knitter@gmx.de> wrote:
> >> VDR User wrote:
> >>> Another option would be to look at both proposals, take the best ideas
> >>> for each, and marry them into a new hybrid proposal so-to-speak.  By
> >>> that I don't mean something which must be built completely from the
> >>> ground up..  Most of the work has already been done.  I think that is
> >>> a workable solution that can be found somewhere in the middle.
> >>>
> >> Thinking about all the posts within the last days, I did not propose
> >> something as this as I don´t believe that certain persons are still
> >> willing to cooperate or change their point of view. To be more precise:
> >> I think it would be a wonder if Steven Toth and Manu Abraham worked
> >> together. ;)
> >>
> >> With kind regards
> >
> > For the record, Manu did a great job with Multiproto.  Steve worked
> > with the multiproto API and added driver support for his devices.
> > Steve depended on Multiproto in order for his devices to work.  Steve
> > asked Manu when he would merge into the master branch, and waited
> > patiently for months.  Manu wouldn't even merge Steve's drivers into
> > Manu's own multiproto tree.  After repeatedly asking him to merge with
> > no sign of progress, Steve was left in a tough spot and had to come up
> > with his own solution.
> >
> > There is a saying that goes often for Linux development... "release
> > early, release often" ..  I first heard this saying from Johannes.  If
> > you dont go by this way of thinking, ie:  hold on to code for two and
> > a half years without allowing a merge, there is no guarantee that
> > somebody else may come up with a better solution.
> >
> > There was no sign that Multiproto would _ever_ get merged.  All of us
> > have waited for two and a half years for this.  The FIRST pull request
> > from Manu only appeared after Steve posted his own API proposal.  Had
> > Manu requested merge but one day before that, it would have been
> > merged and that would have been the end of it.
> >
> > As it turns out, Steve's API is more flexible, and allows us to
> > support more features than Multiproto allows.  If Manu would have
> > allowed Multiproto to have been merged into the master branch, Steve
> > would never have designed this newer API.  Due to the superior design,
> > that was the chosen extension.  This is where we are left today.
> >
> > I hope that clears things up.
> >
> 
> Julian put together a history (just because Michael keeps writing the same):
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/19/67
> 
> Markus
> 

I know we all should stop, but that is hard too ...

Julian seems to be not aware about all prays to Manu during the last
merge windows.

Manu, please, please, please ...

The v4l-dvb-maintainer@linuxtv.org list is still public.

Should Steve wait for ever?

The user point of course is one important thing, but previously the
application developers came. And I know they were all very unhappy,
except maybe vdr, who moved forward for multiproto already.

Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
Klaus himself?

At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.

To prepare the kernel sync and give the patchmonkey on Johannes' request
for dvb too, are only a very few percent of his work and the "thanks" he
had for this so far are it not worth at all ...

On all other major projects, where he is the maintainer, such absurd
stuff did never happen.

The dvb guys inside don't get their stuff together and do exclude each
other. At least Steve had no other choice than to come up with his own
solution.

What a bullshit to accuse Mauro of missing maintainer ship, all asked
him to stay out as far as possible to continue to play there own games! 

But they just load the daily dirt on him they preferably don't like to
care themselves for at all, including patch reviewing in many parts.

Also Mike did more integration work across the frameworks than anyone
else during the last year. That by the way.

Cheers,
Hermann








_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Janne Grunau]

Hi Hermann,

replying only to you since every mail the the ml will only keep this 
meaningless discussion alive.

On Friday 26 September 2008 01:37:12 hermann pitton wrote:
> Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> Klaus himself?

No, he signed one message with "Derek" and Klaus has said on the vdr ml 
that he will implement the API which gets merged.

Janne

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[VDR User]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> Klaus himself?

No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.

> At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.

If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
street the other day.

Regards,
-Derek

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[hermann pitton]

Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> > Klaus himself?
> 
> No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
> address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
> 
> > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
> 
> If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
> be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
> street the other day.
> 
> Regards,
> -Derek

Hi Uwe,

welcome back.

Cheers,
Hermann



_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Douglas Schilling Landgraf]

Hello,

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:37:12 +0200
hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:

> 
> Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> Klaus himself?
> 
> At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.

Agreed. He's *totally lost* about Mauro's work. 
 
> To prepare the kernel sync and give the patchmonkey on Johannes'
> request for dvb too, are only a very few percent of his work and the
> "thanks" he had for this so far are it not worth at all ...
> 
> On all other major projects, where he is the maintainer, such absurd
> stuff did never happen.
> 
> The dvb guys inside don't get their stuff together and do exclude each
> other. At least Steve had no other choice than to come up with his own
> solution.

Definitely.

> What a bullshit to accuse Mauro of missing maintainer ship, all asked
> him to stay out as far as possible to continue to play there own
> games! 

For sure, there are people here trying this every single day.
Insted of spend time improving drivers they prefer attack Mauro and
people that are working hard in their spare time.

> But they just load the daily dirt on him they preferably don't like to
> care themselves for at all, including patch reviewing in many parts.
> 
> Also Mike did more integration work across the frameworks than anyone
> else during the last year. That by the way.

Agreed.

Cheers,
Douglas

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Christophe Thommeret]

Le Friday 26 September 2008 03:18:30 hermann pitton, vous avez écrit :
> Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> 
wrote:
> > > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> > > Klaus himself?
> >
> > No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
> > address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
> >
> > > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
> >
> > If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
> > be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
> > street the other day.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -Derek
>
> Hi Uwe,
>
> welcome back.

LOL


-- 
Christophe Thommeret


_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[VDR User]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:18 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
>> > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
>> > Klaus himself?
>>
>> No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
>> address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
>>
>> > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
>>
>> If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
>> be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
>> street the other day.
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Derek
>
> Hi Uwe,
>
> welcome back.
>
> Cheers,
> Hermann

You should really pay more attention to the part that says:

Regards,
-Derek

In case you missed it, here it is for the third time....

Regards,
-Derek

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Douglas Schilling Landgraf]

Hello,

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:50:07 +0200
"Markus Rechberger" <mrechberger@gmail.com> wrote:

> permanent development for the last couple of months.
> All you could do there is to take out the usbids copy it to
> linuxtv.org and play against all the people
> who contributed to the other tree and which is manufacturer supported.
> 
> I'd really better think twice if you want to keep up reverse
> engineered drivers with linux which are capable
> of melting devices (this happens with wrong configurations).
> 
> Why am I interested in DVB? Because we have devices supporting
> multiple standards which are yet
> not directly supported by the DVB framework.

IMO, since I start in v4l/dvb you are always interested in create new
flame wars. Sorry my sincerely.

If you are really interested about v4l/dvb users why I don't see you in
plumbers conference to understand your point of view and discuss with
API is better?  
 
> The lies that I forked off the driver which I initially submitted to
> linuxtv is ridiculous as you modified the wiki
> site on linuxtv.org. See all that you and Mauro basically have done is
> copying the code from mcentral.de

Yes, "always copying your forked and GPL code".

> and trying to build up a second front against the manufacturer
> supported work.

It's not true.

> I'm seriously for a new Maintainer election here, let's see what will
> come up during the next few days.

Keep working Markus.
 
Cheers,
Douglas

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[hermann pitton]

Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:42 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:18 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> >> > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> >> > Klaus himself?
> >>
> >> No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
> >> address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
> >>
> >> > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
> >>
> >> If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
> >> be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
> >> street the other day.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -Derek
> >
> > Hi Uwe,
> >
> > welcome back.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Hermann
> 
> You should really pay more attention to the part that says:
> 
> Regards,
> -Derek
> 
> In case you missed it, here it is for the third time....
> 
> Regards,
> -Derek

Come down, there is really enough work for everyone.

So in the end, you publicly announce to kill me and are sure do to the
right thing here?

Because you are Derek?

Think twice.

Hermann



_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[hermann pitton]

Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 21:09 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:06 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> >
> > Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:42 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:18 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> >> > Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> >> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> >> >> > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> >> >> > Klaus himself?
> >> >>
> >> >> No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
> >> >> address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
> >> >>
> >> >> > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
> >> >>
> >> >> If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
> >> >> be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
> >> >> street the other day.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> -Derek
> >> >
> >> > Hi Uwe,
> >> >
> >> > welcome back.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Hermann
> >>
> >> You should really pay more attention to the part that says:
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -Derek
> >>
> >> In case you missed it, here it is for the third time....
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -Derek
> >
> > Come down, there is really enough work for everyone.
> >
> > So in the end, you publicly announce to kill me and are sure do to the
> > right thing here?
> >
> > Because you are Derek?
> >
> > Think twice.
> >
> > Hermann
> 
> What the hell are you talking about?  Are you drunk or on drugs right
> now?  Sober up before you post again because your imaginary nonsense
> is making you look a bit foolish.

I get you.



_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[VDR User]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:06 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:42 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:18 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
>> > Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
>> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
>> >> > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
>> >> > Klaus himself?
>> >>
>> >> No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
>> >> address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
>> >>
>> >> > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
>> >>
>> >> If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong.  You'd
>> >> be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in off the
>> >> street the other day.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> -Derek
>> >
>> > Hi Uwe,
>> >
>> > welcome back.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Hermann
>>
>> You should really pay more attention to the part that says:
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Derek
>>
>> In case you missed it, here it is for the third time....
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Derek
>
> Come down, there is really enough work for everyone.
>
> So in the end, you publicly announce to kill me and are sure do to the
> right thing here?
>
> Because you are Derek?
>
> Think twice.
>
> Hermann

What the hell are you talking about?  Are you drunk or on drugs right
now?  Sober up before you post again because your imaginary nonsense
is making you look a bit foolish.

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Markus Rechberger]

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf
<dougsland@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:37:12 +0200
> hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
>
>>
>> Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
>> Klaus himself?
>>
>> At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
>
> Agreed. He's *totally lost* about Mauro's work.
>
>> To prepare the kernel sync and give the patchmonkey on Johannes'
>> request for dvb too, are only a very few percent of his work and the
>> "thanks" he had for this so far are it not worth at all ...
>>
>> On all other major projects, where he is the maintainer, such absurd
>> stuff did never happen.
>>
>> The dvb guys inside don't get their stuff together and do exclude each
>> other. At least Steve had no other choice than to come up with his own
>> solution.
>
> Definitely.
>
>> What a bullshit to accuse Mauro of missing maintainer ship, all asked
>> him to stay out as far as possible to continue to play there own
>> games!
>
> For sure, there are people here trying this every single day.
> Insted of spend time improving drivers they prefer attack Mauro and
> people that are working hard in their spare time.
>
>> But they just load the daily dirt on him they preferably don't like to
>> care themselves for at all, including patch reviewing in many parts.
>>
>> Also Mike did more integration work across the frameworks than anyone
>> else during the last year. That by the way.
>
> Agreed.
>

the merge request has been pushed out for for Manu's code.

I'm also dealing alot with DVB and related issues (eg. the i2c messup,
as for the cx88 based
devices pcmcia iomem reservation back then .. and many other issues
which went through other
subsystems).

That there's no progress at the other sides is not true:
http://mcentral.de/hg/~mrec/em28xx-new/shortlog

permanent development for the last couple of months.
All you could do there is to take out the usbids copy it to
linuxtv.org and play against all the people
who contributed to the other tree and which is manufacturer supported.

I'd really better think twice if you want to keep up reverse
engineered drivers with linux which are capable
of melting devices (this happens with wrong configurations).

Why am I interested in DVB? Because we have devices supporting
multiple standards which are yet
not directly supported by the DVB framework.

The lies that I forked off the driver which I initially submitted to
linuxtv is ridiculous as you modified the wiki
site on linuxtv.org. See all that you and Mauro basically have done is
copying the code from mcentral.de
and trying to build up a second front against the manufacturer supported work.

I'm seriously for a new Maintainer election here, let's see what will
come up during the next few days.

Markus

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[hermann pitton]

Am Freitag, den 26.09.2008, 06:50 +0200 schrieb Markus Rechberger:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:27 AM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf
> <dougsland@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:37:12 +0200
> > hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> >> Klaus himself?
> >>
> >> At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
> >
> > Agreed. He's *totally lost* about Mauro's work.
> >
> >> To prepare the kernel sync and give the patchmonkey on Johannes'
> >> request for dvb too, are only a very few percent of his work and the
> >> "thanks" he had for this so far are it not worth at all ...
> >>
> >> On all other major projects, where he is the maintainer, such absurd
> >> stuff did never happen.
> >>
> >> The dvb guys inside don't get their stuff together and do exclude each
> >> other. At least Steve had no other choice than to come up with his own
> >> solution.
> >
> > Definitely.
> >
> >> What a bullshit to accuse Mauro of missing maintainer ship, all asked
> >> him to stay out as far as possible to continue to play there own
> >> games!
> >
> > For sure, there are people here trying this every single day.
> > Insted of spend time improving drivers they prefer attack Mauro and
> > people that are working hard in their spare time.
> >
> >> But they just load the daily dirt on him they preferably don't like to
> >> care themselves for at all, including patch reviewing in many parts.
> >>
> >> Also Mike did more integration work across the frameworks than anyone
> >> else during the last year. That by the way.
> >
> > Agreed.
> >
> 
> the merge request has been pushed out for for Manu's code.
> 
> I'm also dealing alot with DVB and related issues (eg. the i2c messup,
> as for the cx88 based
> devices pcmcia iomem reservation back then .. and many other issues
> which went through other
> subsystems).
> 
> That there's no progress at the other sides is not true:
> http://mcentral.de/hg/~mrec/em28xx-new/shortlog
> 
> permanent development for the last couple of months.
> All you could do there is to take out the usbids copy it to
> linuxtv.org and play against all the people
> who contributed to the other tree and which is manufacturer supported.
> 
> I'd really better think twice if you want to keep up reverse
> engineered drivers with linux which are capable
> of melting devices (this happens with wrong configurations).
> 
> Why am I interested in DVB? Because we have devices supporting
> multiple standards which are yet
> not directly supported by the DVB framework.
> 
> The lies that I forked off the driver which I initially submitted to
> linuxtv is ridiculous as you modified the wiki
> site on linuxtv.org. See all that you and Mauro basically have done is
> copying the code from mcentral.de
> and trying to build up a second front against the manufacturer supported work.
> 
> I'm seriously for a new Maintainer election here, let's see what will
> come up during the next few days.
> 


A new maintainer for dvb?

Was there ever one ?

It likely is the evilest swamp I can imagine.

Who could be ever interested in such? YOU ?

Be sure on video4linux we'll never discuss it ever again.

Cheers,
Hermann


_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of viwer

[Mika Laitio]

> You can also find patched enduser applications on mcentral.de which can be used
> with other devices and provide extra features which are required in
> order to get devices
> work properly.
> There's gqradio patched to support lirc and digital audio
> automatically, same with vlc and tvtime
> (the last one also having different video output plugins which allow
> software rendering if xvideo
> hardware acceleration isn't available.
>
> Still one fact till now is that not all devices which have worked in
> v4l-dvb-experimental back in time
> are now supported by v4l-dvb on linuxtv.org and nor all the em28xx
> based devices are yet in the
> em28xx-new tree, whereas the second one is the result of heavy
> refactoring and better manufacturer
> support for some back then reverse engineered components (-which is
> good that they got replaced in order
> to raise the signal strength).

The problem here is that only a few developers knows about this, while 
there could be a hundred of thousands of end users. If some hardware like
HVR-4000 or AF9015 have been able to get working by developers let's say 
about 6 month ago, then that support should be available in the latest 
kernels and latest distros. It is really messy for them try to figure out
multiple different repositories which support their hardware and then
compile and try each of them separately to find out

a) which are supported with their kernel versions
b) differences in supported features and patches in each repository
c) how to get hardware A supported by repository X and hardware B 
supported by the repository Y work together with user app Z which requires 
patch C for hardware A and patch D for hardware B...

So the only solution is really to get things from development trees back 
to main v4l-dvb development repository which acts like a final barrier 
for checking co-existence of different works before things get merged to Linux 
kernel.

For me it seems that this is now not happening because people argue from 
a) different ways the ways how to do things (this is good as there are often multiple
different requirements and possibilities for doing things)
b) How to make a good technical decision between multiple different 
choises after the discussion that satisfies everybody (this is the thing 
that is currently not happening)

As step (b) is now failing, the gap between main repository and 
development repositories get huge and messy.

What do you think, could think work better if there would be a couple of 
people who would actively try to find things that work for example in 
Mantis, multiproto, af915 and S2API trees  and then try to find a way for 
re-formatting those patches to form that would be acceptable to main 
repository. This would after all follow the spirit of GPL which encourages 
the evolment of work made by people, instead of making anybody to be the 
only owner of certain new work (that is in after all based to work made by 
others earlier)

Good thing in that would be that it would speeden up the 
merging of the development. Bad thing would be that in perfect world this 
"patch monkey" would not be needed at all because developers would them 
self send "signed of" patches with much faster frequency than what is 
currently happening. In addition this "I r

Afterwards it is easy to be wise, but maybe following development steps 
would have worked much better 2-1 years ago with multiproto tree for 
example

a) manu send patch (was done)
b) somebody reviweed it (was done)
c) discussion from a and b...
c) vote in the list whether some of the directions suggested with a, b and 
c steps is the way to go
d) announcement of the vote result
e) everybody agrees and somebody would have started to assist manu for 
getting agreed changes to DVB-V4L tree.
f) manu and others would have started to merge work from multiproto tree 
to V4L-DVB tree...

So instead of trying to make things work perfectly in development tree,
big steps should be agreed and then start working with smaller steps to 
get things faster merged back to main tree.

Mika

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb

Re: [linux-dvb] [ANNOUNCE] DVB API improvements End-user point of view

[Igor M. Liplianin]

В сообщении от 26 September 2008 07:09:23 VDR User написал(а):
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:06 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> 
wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:42 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:18 PM, hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@arcor.de> 
wrote:
> >> > Am Donnerstag, den 25.09.2008, 18:14 -0700 schrieb VDR User:
> >> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:37 PM, hermann pitton 
<hermann-pitton@arcor.de> wrote:
> >> >> > Who the hell is VDR User <user.vdr@gmail.com> ?
> >> >> > Klaus himself?
> >> >>
> >> >> No, I am not Klaus as could be assumed by simply looking at my email
> >> >> address.  I am, however, a long-time linux dvb and VDR user.
> >> >>
> >> >> > At least he knows nothing about Mauro's real work on video4linux.
> >> >>
> >> >> If that comment was directed towards me then you're very wrong. 
> >> >> You'd be making a terrible mistake if you think I just wandered in
> >> >> off the street the other day.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> -Derek
> >> >
> >> > Hi Uwe,
> >> >
> >> > welcome back.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Hermann
> >>
> >> You should really pay more attention to the part that says:
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -Derek
> >>
> >> In case you missed it, here it is for the third time....
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -Derek
> >
> > Come down, there is really enough work for everyone.
> >
> > So in the end, you publicly announce to kill me and are sure do to the
> > right thing here?
> >
> > Because you are Derek?
> >
> > Think twice.
> >
> > Hermann
>
> What the hell are you talking about?  Are you drunk or on drugs right
> now?  Sober up before you post again because your imaginary nonsense
> is making you look a bit foolish.
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-dvb mailing list
> linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
> http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb



Is it possible to clean up mailing list from such messages?
What do peoples read it for?
Is it connected to DVB?

Let's fight each other, hot finnish boys :-)

Igor M. Liplianin

_______________________________________________
linux-dvb mailing list
linux-dvb@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb