On Wednesday 17 March 2004 05:12, Felix Kühling wrote:
dri branches will also need to apply this patch
I don't like that. Can branches still keep their own copy of the old DRM? I'm particulary thinking of the s3virge branch which is unmaintained at the moment. I'm not sure if it even builds, but if it does it would be nice to keep it that way until someone picks it up.
I just checked. It doesn't.
make[6]: *** No rule to make target `../shared/at_scancode.c', needed by `at_scancode.c'. Stop.
etc.
However, Jon has done the right thing by saying "this is what branches need to do to get working again". They shouldn't need to patch _now_, but knowing what needs to be done in the future makes it possible to revive sleeping branches.
I think CVSBranches on the wiki needs to be reorganized into several sections (current, sleeping, and obsolete) to reflect this; current would stay about the same, sleeping would be things like savage and s3virge, and obsolete would be merged branches (r200) or abandoned branches (dmx, smt). The sleeping ones could be annotated with links to mailing list posts describing the major changes.
If that sounds acceptable, let me know so I can rework CVSBranches.
This seems reasonable to me... Thanks for taking this on.
Keith
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
