This sounds awesome. Let me know if I can help somehow.
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 10:31 AM Josh Triplett
wrote:
> On February 16, 2019 6:03:36 AM PST, Daniel Stone
> wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >As has been pretty well documented, I'd like to migrate XCB to GitLab
> >to join the rest of fd.o and X.Org (a
Thanks *very very* much. I for one want to be the first to welcome our new
proper issue tracker overlords. Thanks a ton also for triaging the stale
bug reports.
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 12:19 PM Keith Packard wrote:
> Daniel Stone writes:
>
> > I've done this now, including having moved the bugs
ive it a try at some point if no one else does. --Bart
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Peter Hutterer
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 05:09:05PM -0800, Bart Massey wrote:
>> Daniel, thanks much for the explanation! I sympathize, I really do.
>> But it seems to me that retaini
Daniel, thanks much for the explanation! I sympathize, I really do.
But it seems to me that retaining working code that folks are actually
using has to be a higher priority than simplification. --Bart
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 6:19 AM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12 February 2014 16
Please revert. Keithp has a laptop like this that I've used for a
while: works great. I don't understand why this patch was committed?
--Bart
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Sam Hughes wrote:
> Specifically, this patch:
> http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-May/030892.html
>
> Such lapt
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:19 AM, Mouse wrote:
>>> Whenever possible, variables should be declared at point of first
>>> assignment, so that it is clear that they have been initialized.
>
> There's nothing that says a top-of-block declaration can't include an
> initializer (to a dummy value if nece
I'm reverting it because I shouldn't have committed it without some
kind of consensus from X devs. If somebody else wants to champion it,
they're welcome. --Bart
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> Bart Massey writes:
>
>> You're right,
to enforcing the
community consensus. My apologies for any disruption I've caused.
--Bart
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>> From: Bart Massey
>> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 23:49:06 -0700
>>
>> I'm talking about a programming convention that is s
rick keshishian wrote:
> On 9/11/13, Bart Massey wrote:
>> Well now I feel bad; I thought we had discussed this before and
>> everyone was OK with it. I should revert that patch now, I guess? My
>> sincere apologies for being premature.
>>
>> For the record, though, I
Well now I feel bad; I thought we had discussed this before and
everyone was OK with it. I should revert that patch now, I guess? My
sincere apologies for being premature.
For the record, though, I totally and vehemently disagree with the
"bad style" argument. Separating definition from declaratio
Committed. Thanks! --Bart
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Anyone could apply and push this patch? Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Arnaud Fontaine
> ___
> xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
> Archives: http://lists.
Thank you!
Reviewed-By: Bart Massey
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Cc'ing xorg-devel as -Wdeclaration-after-statement is actually defined
> in xorg/util/macros.
>
> Alan Coopersmith writes:
>
>> On 08/23/13 01:04 AM, Ar
idea of what it will look like. If
somebody wanted to pick it up and finish it, that would be great;
otherwise I'll get to it sometime soon.
--Bart
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:20 AM, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013, Bart Massey wrote:
>
>> In keeping with
Here's my 2013 X.Org Foundation "State of X.Org" Report, covering
activities in 2012. Enjoy.
Bart Massey
Secretary, X.Org Foundation
b...@x.org
-
The State of The X.Org Foundation 2013
Bart Massey
Secretary, X.Org Foundation
b...@cs.pdx.edu
Abstract: 2012 has been a yea
AFAIK (which is not very far) Kdrive is still the easiest way to
quickly cobble together a minimalist server for some wacky hardware or
software environment, no? I'm not sure it is worth killing, given how
small and simple it is. No opinion on the other ones, though.
Is there a document around som
One lower-impact compromise would be to simply rename private fields
of the structs to something obviously wrong when compiling without
__XSERVER__. Easy-ish patches to get right, and preserves ABI
compatibility. If you generate the secret names with a macro, you can
change them regularly to ensure
Uh, if the code's keithp's or dstone's or somebody like that, just ask
them to fix it. They will likely respond both promptly and positively.
--Bart
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
> On 12-01-26 09:19 PM, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Gaetan Nadon writes:
>>
>>> The
y of your X.Org
technical expertise.
If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to
contact me by email.
As always, thanks much for your work on behalf of X.Org.
Sincerely,
Bart Massey
X.Org Foundation Board of Directors
bart.mas...@gmail.com
___
18 matches
Mail list logo
