David McIntyre wrote:
> Yes, but the code would still be present and operational unless it were
> somehow deactivated.

Why would we deactivate it?

>>Now that would be hazardous if anything. The Archos versions have been
>>functional all along, thanks to the daily builds. If we try now to
>>remove the iRiver stuff, we will certainly break the Archos code as
>>well. Then the 2.5 release will be more bug-ridden than the dailes
>>before it.
>
> My argument was against releasing 2.5 at this stage in the development
> process. Thanks for backing up my point. :)

Read again. This was my argument against removing the iRiver code for
the 2.5 release.

> When you support iRiver, it's going to be press whether you like it or not.
> A lot of people are buying them for podcast recording these days, and it's
> the only currently-marketed device that can support Rockbox (or will in
> time).

Yes, but that won't be until the 2.6 or 3.0 release. The 2.5 release
will not claim iRiver support.

> Since a release build is now as trivial as pushing a button, it makes sense
> to do releases with every major bit of functionality or serious bug fix.
> Especially if you have other people doing the work. :)

Exactly. This is why we should release 2.5 before iRiver is stable,
without branching or removing iRiver code.

Linus
_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
Received on Tue Jun 7 02:25:49 2005