Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Jason Tang <jtang@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I just don't think neglecting 2/3 of the user base makes sense. The fact
is, many people use nvidia hardware. It would have seemed that pushing Xorg
1.4.99 to the development repo would have made more sense from a stability
perspective. After all, it is a 'pre-release'.
2/3 of the userbase? Are you relying on smolt stats for that?
Please read the
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=107725&page=3 thread
comment #42 for what is probably a very accurate picture of the timeline here.
The whole thread is actually a valuable read. There was more than
enough time for Nvidia to release beta drivers against the stable ABI
if they desired to do so.
Look at it this way... what if we did all our open driver development
like nvidia does. What if the open video drivers were not ported until
xserver 1.5 was officially released? Would there be any value at all
in doing open video driver development that way? The changes that the
nvidia driver need are surely on par with the changes the open drivers
needed and they could have been done in the same timescale. The real
question is why isn't NVidia syncing their driver development with the
upstream process? And we aren't going to answer that here.
-jef
2/3, 1/3... 1/4... whatever. I'm sure you understand my point that
there are a large number or eager F9 users in pain out there.
I read that nvnews thread (for the second time). And yes, I agree that
(in a perfect world) nvidia should play nice, or at least keep their eye
on the ball concerning upstream changes that may affect them.
Granted, I don't follow the dev group all that closely, so hopefully you
can forgive me for thinking that what we seem to have is a circle of
groups blaming one another for their own collective failure to deliver.
Of course, I can and will wait for the drivers I need to work before
upgrading my primary system. Perhaps most of us 'users' would have been
content with a heads-up about the nvidia breakage, and maybe a rough
timeline of when to expect a fix. That way there would not have been so
many struggling now.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
