On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 09:10:26AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > So a lot has been said about $subject and FESco has asked me > to send a mail to the devel list describing the what and why > of this change. Hi Hans, hi everyone, I have to say that I'm a little bit impressed by the fact that FESCo had to ask you to email devel list, I thought that was normal when such big changes are pushed to Fedora, but whatever. > First the what: ever since AMD and NVIDIA started shipping > their own Linux drivers we have had multiple competing > implementations of libGL.so.1 (and friends) where the way > the linker works means that there can be only one. > This has made installing AMD or NVIDIA's drivers harder > then it has any rights to be and this has been hurting > out users, some of which want to use the vendor supplied > drivers. It often causes broken systems and makes > switching between drivers unnecessarily hard. Until Fedora is not going to ship proprietary drivers, this is not really a problem for Fedora. We want to solve it either way? Ok, but please do not break anyone workflow to achieve this. > libglvnd is a solution for this it is a vendor neutral > implementation of libGL.so.1 which acts as a dispatcher > to one or more glvnd enabled libGL implementations > installed on the systems. I have the impression that libgvlnd is _not_ the solution. libglvnd is developed by Nvidia, and as far as I can see they are the only graphical card company that is working on it. > This also mostly explains the why of this change, > except for why also bring it to Fedora 25 and not > just to Fedora 26 and later? This explain why _YOU_ would like to see the change. Fedora has a way to handle changes proposals (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy). Please ensure you follow all steps to propose your proposal. > The main reason for this is a non-technical reason, > we (as in the Fedora project) have quite vocally > publicly promised we would do so: > https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2016/11/01/discrete-graphics-and-fedora-workstation-25/ As far as I know the only person that is (or could) be able to promise something in the name of the Fedora Project is the Fedora Project Leader (aka: mattdm). AFAIK Uraeus does not has any power to actually do so (nor should he give any message that seems to be stating the official Fedora Project projects/intentions if he is not allowed to do so). I'm very sorry that Uraeus exposed such vision without sharing it _before_ with FESCo using the Change Proposal procedure. Also, Fedora Project is an open source project, is not a company. Due to this, is very hard to announce something that will happen in future, unless that something already landed in rawhide and the community is happy with that (and therefore it seems like it will not be reverted). > And from a technical pov it is ready, despite all the noise > about this update for F25, 2 issues where found with it > in updates-testing and both of these issues have been fixed. Yes, that happened after I opened a FESCo ticket. Before that (and even soon after I opened the ticket) you were asking releng to speedup the push of this change to stable, even thought you knew you were breaking Sway. > For most people it has been rock-solid and it has received > a lot of positive karma in bodhi as this is an update many > people would like to see for F25. Big changes require to comply the Changes Policy, no matter how much the uploader says that the update is "rock solid". Fale -- Fabio Alessandro Locati Red Hat - Senior Consultant PGP Fingerprint: E815 3C49 2A8D FD8B 1CBD BC85 FDB3 DF20 B2DC 9C1B
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
