Re: Discussing issues

[David Dawes <dawes@XFree86.Org>]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 11:58:16AM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:

>If I just leave things alone to run their natural course, it looks 
>like we get:
>
> - a project that does most of the API/feature work and tries an
>   ambitious server rewrite
> - XFree86 that does most of the driver work

I've already said that "XFree86's domain has traditionally been
the X infrastructure, which does include all of what you mention
above," and what you mentioned "above" was: "protocol/library/extension/API
layers, ...  dix/mi and the non-driver portions of the server."

So I think that question has been answered clearly already.

This is what XFree86 traditionally has done and is still currently
interested in.

What I don't understand is why this extra stuff, that sits above
XFree86, needs to get pushed down into XFree86.  I guess there will
always be some disagreement about where infrastructure ends and
the "extra stuff" begins, but XFree86 has basically followed the
traditional "X is mechanism not policy" approach.

I think we'd need some pretty good arguments to change that, as
well as people who would like to make that work within the XFree86
structure.  There are those who don't think it can be made to work
within the XFree86 structure and so they would be better off seeking
a new structure of where 'X is mechanism and policy' for this "extra
stuff".

>Let me be crystal clear: this is NOT a favorable outcome while I'm
>wearing any of my hats, from Red Hat to freedesktop.org to just plain
>old Havoc.

And neither is any outcome that disenfranchises those XFree86
developers with the most time and effort invested in XFree86 itself.

David
-- 
David Dawes
Founder/committer/developer                     The XFree86 Project
www.XFree86.org/~dawes
_______________________________________________
Forum mailing list
Forum@XFree86.Org
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum