Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
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?
Yes. Many of them would. We do tell vendors and partners that we cant
introduce a new feature as a update and they would have to wait till the
next release or the one after that.
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 ;-)
Mike Harris doesnt work for Red Hat anymore though he expressed interest
in continuing to participate in Fedora. Adam Jackson is the current
maintainer and I believe he has already expressed his decision.
Rahul
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
