On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 09:02:50AM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> Our questions to the community are:
>
> * What kinds of X packages would you like to see in the future?
Working ones. With as few (upstream and debian-specific) bugs as
possible.
Case at hand: I have yet to see the first XFree86 (server|module) and
graphics board combination that
* supports the full potential of the board
* does not reproducably receive SIGSEGV
* is free
This is, of course, not the fault of the Debian X strike force, but it's
painful none the less.
> * Should we regard X.Org or FreeDesktop.Org as our upstream source?
Whichever of the two helps further the above goal.
> * Should we go our own way starting from the "sanitized" XFree86 CVS
> snapshot we've prepared?
If you think you can do a better job than both of the two upstreams, I'd
say go for it; but I think that's a huge job.
> * Should we ensure that multiple implementations of the X Window System
> are packaged, or standardize on just one?
It would be great if we would have the man power to support two
(or more) competing X Window System implementations, but wouldn't it be
more prudent to start off with one and add more if people seem to be
doing "nothing"?
> * If we standardize on just one, which one should it be?
The one that will, in your opinion, serve our users best.
I'm deliberately not choosing sides here, even though I know you're
asking for people to choose sides. IMO, however, you (the X Strike
Force) are best qualified to choose which way to go from now. I
therefore suggest you consider the above guidelines (and add some of
your own), and make the decision for yourself.
After all, _you_ will be the one people will yell at when you chose the
X Window System with the most features (because people like features)
but with the most bugs, too.
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
WATER
-- with thanks to fortune
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature