On 03/ 1/11 09:52 AM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:14:26PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
>> Do we need more formal rules for merging code? The RandR 1.4 server code
>> was merged before the protocol and library APIs had seen sufficient
>> review, but we don't have a formal process for either of those
>> modules. Anyone know how to help with that? -- We don't have an official
>> protocol tree maintainer at this point, although Daniel Stone did
>> volunteer to put together another proposal for merging those trees
>> together, and if that happened, maybe we could convince him to run a
>> couple of cycles as release manager.
>
> Yeah, that got caught up in unexpected holiday and/or moving continents;
> by the time I'd got to it, I'd missed the feature freeze for 1.10, so
> just shuffled it down my TODO list and moved on. I could try again for
> 1.11, and am happy to maintain it.
>
> I described my rough plan here:
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg-devel/2010-September/013145.html
Seems like it would make things like dropping RandR 1.4 but keeping the
new Sync version for 1.10 a little harder, but maybe that will just provide
additional encouragement to get the protocol changes locked down farther in
advance of the server release.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@oracle.com
Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System
_______________________________________________
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
