On Friday 23 December 2005 09:33, Nat Friedman wrote: > For the first 10 or 12 months of development, there was no material > outside contribution to Xgl. ... > largely functional state as fast as possible, without external drag. so .... nobody was contributing to it (really implying nobody else cared enough), but you were concerned about external drag? *scratches head*
> There are some specific corners we decided to cut (Don't wait for > standalone EGL in the kernel, we're running Xgl on top of GL/X). makes sense to do what needs to be done ... pragamatism is good. > And of course we don't mind getting credit for the work either. there are other ways of accomplishing this. unless you mean "we wanted *all* the credit and so decided not to let *anyone else* help" which really makes me scratch my head. how much value do you really think there is in getting the credit here versus how much good does it do to engage in an open process? > Obviously, had there been a huge amount of interest from outside > contributors, we wouldn't have made that decision. ok, i'm feeling a bit stupid here because i don't see the connection this sentence is attempting to make. i don't see why working on it alone means keeping the results away from everyone else. > It's great that so many people want to contribute now. That is a new > development, and a positive one. yes, it is very positive. let's nurture (as opposed to frustrate) that. > As for the future, David has been planning to clean up what he's working > on now and get it in a functional/mergeable state. The plan is to get > it working and merged as soon as possible, but he's shooting > specifically for XDevConf, which is in early February. great; i'll revisit this issue in february then. > it isn't very long for anyone to wait. yes, february is quite close at this point: 2 months. but if you count from the initial closing of the project, which is the real cost, it's a slightly different number one arrives at. > P.S. Amusing to see everyone citing a time-restricted LWN article on > this topic. Which I have no problem with; more power to LWN. But oh, > the irony. ;-) this isn't about commercialism or time-restrictions, but questioning if diverting the development process is the best thing for the open source desktop. so there is no irony here; we already know LWN doesn't work with others to write their articles and they've always been that way =) i do wonder is if this is going to be how general OSS devel is to be handled within Novell or if this is a one-off, an experiment or what-have-you. i was encouraged by how SUSE was opening up (YAST, OpenSUSE). either way, it's obviously your choice and i am in no position to play judge to your decisions. but knowing who i'm working with makes my decision making easier; i assume others are similar in this way. -- Aaron J. Seigo GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 Full time KDE developer sponsored by Trolltech (http://www.trolltech.com)
pgp866Ac0wl8a.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Desktop_architects mailing list Desktop_architects@lists.osdl.org https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects