Xorg 1.5 missed the train?

[Christopher Stone]

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:
> Christopher Stone wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 May 2008 15:54:52 -0700
>>> "Christopher Stone" <chris.stone at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If it's that simple, you should be able to do it yourself.  The code is
>>>>> there.  Have at it.
>>>>>
>>>>> (HINT: It's not simple at all)
>>>>
>>>> According to this thread it seems pretty simple actually:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=188645
>>>
>>> Sure.  Creating them locally is simple.  Then all you'd have to do is
>>> get it past review, get the primary Xorg maintainer to agree, and
>>> support it for the entire release.  Which includes handling all the bug
>>> reports for it.  Which you might get a lot of and won't be able
>>> to do a damn thing about because of binary drivers.
>>
>> I don't give a hoot if the packages are supported or not, I just want
>> an easy way to get my nVidia card working.  All you people do is gripe
>> and moan about how much work it would be and all this and that.  Look,
>> its just a matter of adding rpms to a repo, make an "unsupported" repo
>> if you have to.  The bottom line is you want to have as many people
>> testing the OS as possible.
>>
> Then please, make your own repo for those people who do not want supported,
> qa'd, bug-fixed packages.  However, in Fedora all of these things fit into
> the definition of a maintained package.  So by that measure I'd say ajax is
> doing a very, very good job making sure Fedora 9 will have a robust upstream
> community supporting it for the life of the release whereas sticking the old
> xorg version into the distro when its known that no one's going to spend
> time working on it would be plainly irresponsible.
>
>>>> If redhat wants to pay me $100k a year, I'll happily make xorg compat
>>>> rpms in about one day.  Thank you very much.
>>>
>>> I believe that shows your fundamental lack of understanding about
>>> Fedora and open source software on many levels.
>>
>> I believe you have no idea what you are talking about.  If I
>> maintained a package which I knew was not going to work with 50% of
>> the users hardware, and I was being paid to maintain this package,
>> then I certainly would spend some time to allow those 50% a way to use
>> their hardware with the rest of the OS.  Nothing more to it than that,
>> it has nothing to do with open source, it has everything to do with
>> being professional.
>>
> Uhm... xorg-x11-drv-vesa?  xorg-x11-drv-nv?  xorg-x11-drv-nouveau?  I think
> some time has been spent "to allow those 50% a way to use their hardware
> with the rest of the OS".
>
> You're asking for the wrong thing here.  You want X to support optional
> features of your hardware.  The means you're proposing to accomplish this is
> by adding an unmaintained software package into the distro until a
> proprietary driver is fixed to support it.  This doesn't strike me as a good
> way for Fedora to proceed and you're unlikely to get any traction  for
> making a change there.

Why can't they just be added to updates-testing and left there?
Packages in this repo are not supported in the same sense as the ones
in updates.