>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:54:56 +0300
>From: "Vignatti Tiago (Nokia-MS/Helsinki)" <tiago.vigna...@nokia.com>
>User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
>Reply-To: tiago.vigna...@nokia.com
>Sender: xorg-devel-bounces+pao=ascent....@lists.x.org
>
>On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 03:50:02PM +0200, ext Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> Vignatti Tiago (Nokia-MS/Helsinki) wrote:
>> > The whole point to create a consistent protocol is the life time that it
>> > will
>> > last. Right now I don't see any consistency between X applications that I'm
>> > building today with the ones we had in the last decade. I cannot run both
>> > in
>> > the same X server. I even doubt I can use today's X app in the upcoming 2
>> > or
>> > 3 years server.
>>
>> Then you have horribly broken your X server - we are still running 20 year
>> old
>> apps on Xorg here, in modern GNOME & Compiz desktops alongside brand new
>> apps.
>
>20 years old *core* apps, i.e., using the core protocol. I can run those here
>because MeeGo's server stills compliant with X11 protocol.
>
>But hey, why do we care about these very old apps being compliant with todays
>server? Who in fact really uses those?
I really hope that you are indulging in sarcasm, here.
We have customers all over the world that are using our "very old"
applications for mission-critical operations. Well, the applications
themselves are not "very old", but they have grown up over the past 25
years based on our /stable/ infrastructure quite happily using the
core protocol with no extensions. I expect them to continue to run
for years to come.
"Old" does not always imply inferior.
- Patrick
_______________________________________________
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
