On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 04:54:26PM -0400, Carl Busjahn wrote:
> ATI has not been very cooperative with letting the documentation out,
> but they may be now, it took them a month to get the documentation to
> me, and by then School had started :-( There is a cvs branch for mach64
> almost a year old which I have used with limited succes (some gl demos
> worked, but were corrupted - q3a unplayable), and a new patch which
> Manuel Teria and Frank C Earl have been working on, but it's over a
> month old by now. Daryll Strauss wants to see a little more before
> he'll add a new mach64 cvs branch, and it seems like the DRI project
> doesn't know how to handle volunteers. Of course people could mess up a
> cvs tree, but right now there's nothing to mess up.
>
> Daryll, could you explain your views on Mach64 again?
The general idea is that we need a few developers to "take ownership" of
the branch. We generally ask that those developers submit a couple of
patches (just so we can look them over) and then we can give them
access. We need people interested in keeping up the work, merging
branches, dealing with questions, adding new code, etc. It takes some
long term dedication and work.
>From what I've seen so far the authors weren't particularly happy with
how the patches worked, and they weren't up for taking ownership of that
part of the project. If I've misunderstood, then the authors should
contact me directly. I'm happy to see this ramp up, but so far it hasn't
picked up much development momentum.
- |Daryll
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
