Re: Discussing issues

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:19:36 -0400, Havoc Pennington <> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 08:25:16PM +0100, Alan Hourihane wrote:
I really don't think your going to get a clear answer to this question.

Open Source exists for the fact that people can't agree on how to do
things. KDE vs Gnome, Unix vs Windows, and so on. Technologies compete.
It's the way of life.

I have no doubt someone will always disagree with the answer. That doesn't bother me. What I'm interested in is what most of the key developers from X, GTK+, Qt, major vendors, etc. can agree on.

In other words, sure there won't ever be a 100% answer, but I predict
there will be a 90% de facto answer, and moreover my view is that
there *should* be such a 90% answer. The reason there should be is one
of platform vs.  applications, or choice vs. fragmentation.  (see

GTK+ and Qt, GNOME and KDE are very concerned to use the same X and
have a standard place to put X enhancements; that alone is enough to
get the 90%, even if OS vendors, Mozilla, OpenOffice, and others
weren't concerned about it.

There will also be some set of X APIs that lands in the LSB, and some
set that is shipped across the major operating systems.

One of my primary concerns in fact is to drive many platform aspects
of GNOME/KDE/Mozilla/OpenOffice/whatever down into X. That's why I
want to see a single X project, so it can include things like fontconfig/STSF, or

If Keith forks, you will get a "battle" scenario for a while, sure.
But eventually, the "outside world" will pick one of the X
implementation projects. The direction of X will effectively be
whatever that X implementation project does. The other X projects will
either have to copy the main one and sync to its APIs, or limit
themselves to being a nice platform for twm or embedded or some other

However, if we get agreement among what's really a pretty small group
of people (most of them on this list), we could avoid the hassle and
delay and just design a solution up front. In addition to avoiding the
XFree86 fork, we could take the opportunity to merge with

I find it hard to believe that with all the smart people on this list,
we can't solve what is essentially a simple problem - there are even
many well-demonstrated case studies and proven approaches available
for copying.

And why are you assuming it will be KeithX's? I think in such a battle XFree86 will win. We've won before, we'll do it again. I don't believe
Keith's X will win unless of course Linux wants to lose entirely.

I said to the almond tree, "Sister, speak to me of God.", and the almond tree blossomed. -- Nikos Kazantzakis

Easter is April 27th.
Forum mailing list

[X.Org]     [XFree86]     [XFree86 Discussion]     [XFree86 Newbie]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Samba]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux