> On Sep 9, 2011 1:42 PM, "Ilya Chernykh" <anixxsus@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Friday 09 September 2011 21:41:23 Calvin Morrison wrote:
>>
>> > > > I mean it is an integral part of a desktop and there is no viable
>> > > > replacement. Therefore I vote that we should adopt it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thoughts?
>> > >
>> > > Call it good or bad but hal will never return to the distributions
>> >
>> > It doesn't matter to users if we provided the packages.
>>
>> Yes but it bars inclusion of Trinity into distributions.
>>
>
> Hal is only unsupported because it is unmaintained. If it was maintained,
> why would distributions not want to include it?
>

I do NOT want to maintain HAL.  We do not have the resources to do that. 
HAL requires continual updates to work with new hardware.

It would be far easier to simply implement the libraries that I keep
mentioning.  The problem is that replacing HAL (which is easier than
maintaining it) is still quite resource intensive.

Tim