>Another interesting point is that you have your own fork of the
> XFree tree. This further limits the input into the design by
> eliminating all the qualified X developers without direct rendering
> interest from the discussion. They all live/work on the XFree lists
> and don't watch
I think the first thing we need to do is inventory and evaluate all existing
documentation. It is not only important to determine what documentation
exists but also how relevent it is and whether it needs to be updated or
removed from the website. Once we figure out what we have we can then
>Of course we don't know exactly which patents are involved, or what the
>terms of the transfer were. But my guess would be that the patents
>primarily involve hardware, and Microsoft is interested in covering its
>potential liabilities as it moves into the hardware market (though XBox,
>Homestat
Let me toss in my 2 cents.
The problem is that DRI development has never reached critical mass in the
open source world. There was a time when there were quite a few developers
working on DRI related projects a PI or VA but much of the design
discussions
were private and people couldn't eaves
What you say is true, it isn't all that difficult for you and I, but compare
that to Windows where you have one driver set for a whole range of adapters
and all the user has to do is download and click. That is why Windows is so
popular. It is simple. Just because you can say something like
>
>Or it could be that the iDCT core was not developed by ATI, but by someone
>else, and ATI just licensed it. This could explain why they are so
>adamant about not releasing the docs. As for TV-out they might be afraid
>that releasing the specs could be consired equivalent to providing
>Macrov
> > Loki didn't get low level (i.e. register level) idct docs. They got an
>idct
> > library with docs on how to use that library. I don't think PI/VA got
>them
> > either. There is some seriously proprietary stuff with idct that for
>legal
> > reasons ATI wouldn't want to expose.
>
>Woul
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: "David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Re: Re: Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 21:59:11 -0400 (EDT)
>But, you are right: ID might be afraid to open the product that p
>From: Gareth Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Jeffrey W. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: David Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 18:02:16 -0700
>
>
> ** well, let's see how many flames I can generate with this.. **
I'll see if I can generate more.
>One point that I think has been missed is that while Open Source in
>general (and Linux, in particular) improves a lot user and developer
>experience, the binaries get even less value than in
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:19:53 -0400 (EDT)
>
>
>
>Well, we (GATOS) do have the docs, under similar NDA. I believe PI/VA was
>more "doc-rich" ;) But (looking in t
>From: Gareth Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:56:53 -0700
>
>David Johnson wrote:
>
>>
>>They did rele
>From: "Daniel Vogel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 15:51:31 -0400
>
> > They did release specs (under NDA) to many people
> > (including yourself through PI/VA Linux)
>From: Gareth Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] Radeon 8500, what's the plan?
>Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:05:13 -0700
>
>Dacobi Coding wrote:
>
>>
>>But are they planing to, or have they allready releaced the specs
>>
I think Frank's outline of future plans is a good start but let me toss in
my 2 cents.
Overall, I would like to see some focus shift from just developing drivers
to ensuring the infrastructure remains solid and up to date. We can beg
hardware manufacturers all we want to release specs but som
15 matches
Mail list logo
