> But you also might want to consider that i was at a hardware vendor two > weeks ago, and i had to listen to their main engineer calling > contributing directly to X a waste of time, and that they rather fix > the versions their customers ship, and hand the patches to their > customers directly, never bothering to submit to X directly. They rather > implement stuff, hand it to their customers, as they know that their > code will not be accepted, and that it will be reinvented a few weeks or > months later. Then they go and use the reimplementation afterwards, and > save a lot of manpower and frustration in the process. Despite all my > personal feelings about free software and the likes, I had absolutely > nothing to counter, anything i could even try to throw up against that > would either be completely irrelevant and meek, or a lie.
This I'm curious about. Are there more companies that feel it's too-hard/not-worth-while for companies to contribute stuff to Xorg? I know the linux kernel has this issue, but is X's contribution difficulty larger? I ask out of complete curiosity, not trying to stir any pot. Matt _______________________________________________ xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg Your subscription address: arch...@mail-archive.com
