On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 20:33 +0530, Rahul wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > Thank you for reframing the question in a light that many of the rest of > > us are seeing as well! > > > > Put yet another way, upgrading X.org isn't about punishing vendors of > > proprietary drivers, it's about _rewarding_ vendors of open source > > drivers. > > > > If you were the owner of a company that had just announced plans to open > > source your drivers, would you feel you had made the right decision if a > > major linux distribution announced it was planning not to release the > > software that enabled your driver to run because there were still > > vendors who hadn't open sourced their drivers? Where's the creme > > filling? > > Fortunately we arent announcing anything like that. We are just > announcing that we would wait for the next release before we provide > this major update. Thank you for letting me know my wording was ambiguous. If you were the owner of a company that had just announced plans to open source your drivers, would you feel you had made the right decision if a major linux distribution announced it had changed its mind about releasing the software that enabled your driver to run and delayed its shipment for two months *because* there were still vendors whose proprietary drivers were not updated? > You can pain it as a idealogical battle if you want to but that's not what this is about at all. But it is :-) The decision can be made based on the non-ideological points but the ramifications of that decision will be both technical and political. Additionally, Max's email unfortunately summarizes the battle as ideology vs practicality: The reason to upgrade to Xorg-7.1 is to punish the vendors; the reason to hold off is to protect the users which I object to strenuously. Instead of putting the user experience on one side of the equation and ideology on the other phrase the whole thing as ideology (which I did) or the whole thing on satisfying the users (as Oisin Feeley addressed). Even better, since Mike Harris made the original announcement that FC5 was going to have Xorg-7.1 [1]_, let him make the announcement that he decided that 7.1 was going to be too problematic. He's used to being the bearer of bad news ;-) [1]_ https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-July/msg00676.html -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
