Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add sixaxis cable-pairing plugin From: Bastien Nocera To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: BlueZ development In-Reply-To: <1244211333.23850.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1244107722.30768.837.camel@cookie.hadess.net> <1244139239.23850.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1244198560.30768.2403.camel@cookie.hadess.net> <1244207191.23850.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1244209974.30768.2600.camel@cookie.hadess.net> <1244211333.23850.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:48:20 +0100 Message-Id: <1244213300.30768.2668.camel@cookie.hadess.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 List-ID: On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 16:15 +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > > > You can keep personal attacks out of that. I think I've shown enough > > patience trying to get this functionality into bluez proper. > > This is not personal. I am keeping a watch on the dependencies of > BlueZ > and I don't see any need for adding GObject to the mix for the SixAxis > support. Feel free to convince me that GObject based gudev is really > necessary for this. Until then I declare this bloat. No, it's not absolutely necessary, but somebody has to reinvent the wheel, and I'm not happy spending time doing that. > Please remember that BlueZ will run on embedded devices with limited > memory and space requirements. You might argue that these devices > don't > need SixAxis support, but I prefer to keep that option. Yes. And if such uses exist, I'm sure they'd be happy putting some effort into bluez and do the port from gudev to libudev themselves. > > I won't be updating this patch, but Luiz showed interested. My patch > > will show up in the Fedora packages shortly. > > That is your choice. Personally I really dislike if distros just go > against upstream and start merging stuff, because it takes more effort > to get it into upstream first. All my patches are sent upstream before they go into the packages, and I think I put quite a bit of work into this. But at the end of the day, I only have so much time, and rewriting bits of code because the upstream doesn't like GObject isn't what I call a good use of my time. So I'm leaving it to somebody else to go the last mile because I can't be bothered. > On that point, you haven't merged the Socket fix upstream It's not upstreamable, see the RH bugzilla. It depends on a kernel patch that can't go upstream. > and also the > Wacom and UTF-8 fix could be send upstream. They already have, and you commented on them. I still believe the UTF-8 one could be merged as-is, but I don't have a good answer for the Wacom one, which would need more investigation. > I know you send some version > of these at least once or twice, but besides me also Johan could merge > these patches. Cheers