Bug#663006: Why libnfc over The Linux NFC Subsystem ?

[Andreas Henriksson <andreas@fatal.se>]

Hello Oxan!

Thanks for clarifying your view on this. I think it's a good idea
to always state such in an ITP.

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 07:53:38PM +0100, Oxan van Leeuwen wrote:
> While the Linux NFC subsystem might indeed have the best chances to
> survive on the long term, I think currently libnfc is in a better
> state. The NFC subsystem only appeared in Linux 3.1 and still has a
> long way to go before it equals the functionality of libnfc. I
> couldn't find equivalents of relatively simple programs like
> nfc-mfclassic. I also think it's nice to be able to update libnfc
> independent from your kernel, especially since NFC development (in
> general) has quite a high pace nowadays.
> 
> Besides, there are applications that require libnfc. That is because
> they either were designed before the NFC subsystem was born, or need
> to be compatible with other operating systems too. I'd be a shame if
> we couldn't package those applications for Debian.

You could ofcourse package anything you wish, but including it in Debian
is another question for me. Including it in Debian means you are prepared
to maintain it in the long run. Several years to come.
I'd avoid introducing lots of programs that depend on the libnfc API
which you'll later need to port over to a new API and/or provide a migration
path for users to new tools that has been developed for the new stack.

You're ofcourse welcome to disagree.

-- 
Andreas Henriksson