Bill Crawford wrote:
No, the point is that it is a pre-release version of X, shipped will full
knowledge that it will break binary drivers that no reasonable person would
expect to be modified to match yet.
I don't know where to start with the logical fallacies in this but ...
It's not "prerelease" in any sense except "the release not hasn't gone
out yet".
What is it that would suggest that it is finalized to a manager that
might want to commit resources to writing a driver his company will have
to support?
The upstream developers want this shipped, and have decided
the ABI is complete. It could have been labelled "1.5" and the same
thing would still be happening.
No, it wouldn't be the same if that label had been applied and announced
publicly in time for others to coordinate with a shipping date.
It doesn't "break" binary drivers. Binary drivers compiled to work
with an older version need modification to work correctly with it,
Errr, how is that different from breaking? Interfaces work or not.
This means that in actual fact, you are complaining (loudly) about the
failure of nVidia to provide updated drivers for you new distribution,
and expect "us" to provide "you" with a Fedora 9 but without the new
graphics functionality which apparently a lot of people want.
All I expect is a reasonable chance for others to coordinate. This is
like shipping a power cord with a new plug style before announcing the
matching standard for the socket where you are supposed to plug it in.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
