Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
As mentioned in the other ideas thread, I don't really care if it stays as a wrapper or if we call kernel apis directly, except that the later requires us to stay up to date with changes in those ioctls, whereas libgpiod takes care of that. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Hello there!
Well, @dmitrydvorkin raise the ball about simply ditch libgpiod for good and speak directly with kernel calls.
Now we're a group of three and i think we could debate this.
Of course no rush, once it's opensource and we're kinda just knowing each other at this point.
My initial idea on this project was to be the most simple, straightforward and easy wrapper for what kernel people says is the right way to interface with gpio chips.
@noctarius i would hear, at some moment, what do you think about it.
I am not laying any opinion right now, because we don't have communication with libgpiod maintainer right now. And it might be important.
so far this is what we can say right now:
Please at some convenient moment let's speak lightly about it, about the sex of the angels, and other blinky issues. No Rush.
It might be a question not only about codesign excellence, but about 'marketing'. Weird, i know, but this is my opinion and your points of view are important equally!
Sorry my language at some point, i am a bit inebriated by cachaça
Heyy you guys are awesome!!! Let's put nodejs everywhere hahahaha"!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions