On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 17:53:37 +1000, Christopher James Halse Rogers wrote:
> Hi all, > > I understand that it Bryce's habit to give the Debian XSF a heads up on > the plans that Ubuntu have for the X stack each release. As Bryce is > off hacking on Launchpad this release, I'll be responsible for X this > cycle. So here's my attempt at a “heads up” email! > Thanks for this. > I'd like to ensure that we don't unnecessarily duplicate work. I get > the impression that Squeeze will be freezing sometime relatively soon, > so I'd guess that you don't want these mesa and X versions in Sid, but > would experimental be appropriate? I've had good experiences in the > past with the Debian-mono team, and while X is a bit more tied to > platform specifics I'd like to get as much as possible done in Debian. > That's great to hear :) > I can easily test-build against Debian and do some limited testing, and > encourage others to do so, but that might not be sufficient. If that > isn't regarded as sufficient then we can try and ensure our changes are > easily merged with git. I've somewhat been watching on the sidelines > before now - what would you find most helpful? > I've been encouraging people to commit stuff that's not ubuntu specific directly to the debian branches on git.debian.org, and I think that's worked out quite well. I think it'd be nice to use experimental as much as possible during the maverick cycle, so we don't find ourselves with huge diffs after the squeeze release. > So, without further ado, here's what we're aiming for in the next Ubuntu > release: > > * Planned versions: > > We aim for xserver 1.9 and mesa 7.9. These are fairly aggressive > targets, and we'll want to track git and pre-releases quite closely. > I think we can easily use experimental for this until the squeeze release. > We'll be on a 2.6.35 kernel, so we'll have the new 0.0.16 nouveau ABI > which will be reflected in our libdrm packages. > Now that linux 2.6.34 is in experimental we'll probably want to have a newer libdrm and nouveau driver there as well. Sven, would you like to get this uploaded? > For intel, we're looking at 2.11 or potentially 2.12. Sounds fine as well (we already have 2.11 in experimental, moving to 2.12 when it's released would make sense I think). > * Packaging changes: > Those seem mesa related, I don't have much clue about all this so I'll defer to Michel :) Cheers, Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
