On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <dennisml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Then why are people already calling for the rejection of Wayland even > though Wayland is still far from being finished and hasn't even touched > Fedora yet. > > raising concerns != screaming the sky is falling Actually, if we go back to the first post in the thread... it was the premature suggestion by a by stander of bringing a "still far from being finished technology" into Fedora because another entity has prematurely decided to announce to the world that its going to be their default. That triggered a certain amount of bloodletting. If the original poster had come to the conclusion that it was "far from being finished" before writing the first post do you think that the original poster would have written that post in exactly the say way? Something the original poster should probably ruminate on. Generally speaking, if you aren't prepared to talk in detail about the suitability of a technology, you shouldn't bring it up for discussion like that. If you are personally interested in it, you should inquire as to whether there are people in our development community who are currently working on it and ask them questions about it. To come out of the gate suggesting its time to discuss it for inclusion is putting the card before the horse. What the original post is, is a classic enthusiast blunder. The active developers working on the problem space are more than capable of proposing wayland for inclusion and answer questions about wayland...when they feel its ready. By introducing it for discussion before they were ready to engage in that discussion you've actually made it more difficult for the discussion to move forward as you've taken away their best shot to me a good first impression with the tech. -jef -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
