Re: xlibmesa naming and relationships
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 11:36:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 05:29:15PM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> > On Fre, 2003-02-07 at 16:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > The major version number used by Mesa is not the same as the one used by
> > > XFree86, except by coincidence.
> >
> > So the Mesa version needs to be engraved in the package name, no matter
> > how irrelevant it is?
>
> What's irrelevant about it? XFree86 has its versioning system and Mesa
> has its. The XFree86 encapsulates Mesa doesn't mean one should be left
> in ignorance as to what version of Mesa was so encapsulated.
If I may chime in,
I, as a graphics developer very much want to know what version of OpenGL
I'm using, due to the fact different extensions are available in the
different versions. So even though I think the version-number in the
package-name is butt ugly and hard to remember it does fulfill a task,
and that is letting me know which extensions I can expect to find in
there.
/Peter Toneby
--
Alpha Test Version: Too buggy to be released to the paying public.
Beta Test Version: Still too buggy to be released.
Release Version: Alternate pronunciation of "Beta Test Version".
Reply to: