Re: Future of X packages in Debian
Fabio Massimo Di Nitto <fabbione@fabbione.net> wrote:
[...]
> * What kinds of X packages would you like to see in the future?
As a user, all I care about:
* DFSG-free
* supports my hardware
* is ready whenever Debian would like to make a release, i.e. X should
not be the delaying point itself.
* (cross)upgrades cleanly.
> * Should we regard X.Org or FreeDesktop.Org as our upstream source?
X.Org and FreeDesktop.Org are not disjunct entities afaict, xorg is
hosted on fd.org and most (all?) developers participate in both
projects. - They look more like "usable" and "bleeding edge, don't
cut yourself" to me.
> * Should we go our own way starting from the "sanitized" XFree86 CVS
> snapshot we've prepared?
Do you think this is sustainable? Currently the status s quite good, as
many drivers have been backported, but I doubt this can continue
eternally.
> * Should we ensure that multiple implementations of the X Window System
> are packaged, or standardize on just one?
I cannot think of why it would be useful to have e.g. libx11.so from
both xorg and http://freedesktop.org/Software/xlibs in Debian. - Apart
from the fact that they are the same code the interfaces are
standardized.
Afaict the X-strike force _cannot_ ensure that only a single
implementation is packaged, they can only choose the package only a
single implementation themselves.
> * If we standardize on just one, which one should it be?
[...]
The one that is going to fulfill the criteria listed at the top of the
screen when we are thinking about releasing sarge+1.
cu andreas
Reply to: