On Sunday 30 August 2009 04:35:43 am Roland Mas wrote: > I'm less enthusiastic about that part. I did replace the embedded > and patched libusb, but the local patches weren't adding > functionality. In this case, you're removing functionality from > argyll even though it appears not to be used currently. Since I try > to stick to upstream as much as I can, I'd rather not go this way. > I'd much prefer the patch to be included in yajl, preferably > upstream.
Yeah, I thought you might not like that--partly why I made a point to mention the change. When I get a chance, I'll look more closely at what argyll did to yajl and see if Lloyd is interested in applying it upstream. Cheers, John -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
