Xorg 1.5 missed the train?
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
Wed May 21 16:52:13 UTC 2008
Bill Crawford wrote:
>> No, the point is that it is a pre-release version of X, shipped will full
>> knowledge that it will break binary drivers that no reasonable person would
>> expect to be modified to match yet.
>
> I don't know where to start with the logical fallacies in this but ...
>
> It's not "prerelease" in any sense except "the release not hasn't gone
> out yet".
What is it that would suggest that it is finalized to a manager that
might want to commit resources to writing a driver his company will have
to support?
> The upstream developers want this shipped, and have decided
> the ABI is complete. It could have been labelled "1.5" and the same
> thing would still be happening.
No, it wouldn't be the same if that label had been applied and announced
publicly in time for others to coordinate with a shipping date.
> It doesn't "break" binary drivers. Binary drivers compiled to work
> with an older version need modification to work correctly with it,
Errr, how is that different from breaking? Interfaces work or not.
> This means that in actual fact, you are complaining (loudly) about the
> failure of nVidia to provide updated drivers for you new distribution,
> and expect "us" to provide "you" with a Fedora 9 but without the new
> graphics functionality which apparently a lot of people want.
All I expect is a reasonable chance for others to coordinate. This is
like shipping a power cord with a new plug style before announcing the
matching standard for the socket where you are supposed to plug it in.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list