[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: gnome-randr-applet and Xfree86 4.3.0 ...



On Don, 2003-04-03 at 10:04, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 09:28:41AM +0200, Sven Luther scrawled:
> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 05:06:49PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> 
> > > This is the sort of thing that necessitates having the older version in
> > > unstable for a while. XFree86 releases, *ESPECIALLY* .0 releases, are
> > > basically code drops, and have rarely had any porting work done to them,

That won't change if everybody keeps working on old releases.

> > Yes, this is true, but it only proves my point. It has no porting work
> > done to it, because we are doing the porting work in our corner, and
> > don't contribute it back to upstream at least not before the release.
> > 
> > Also maybe they don't support as many architectures as we do, but they
> > support many more OSes, so maybe they have other priorities.
> 
> As I said, take your pick: always having the latest and "greatest", or
> something with rock-solid stability, in unstable. I'll go for the
> latter, personally.

I don't think there's an inherent conflict between goals. Sure, there is if
the porting efforts are made in a fork of an old release...


> > > The alternative involves cloning Branden and/or myself (if you clone me,
> > > don't clone the RSI bit, that's counter-productive).
> > 
> > Or adding more people to the X strike team. Something which you are more
> > likely to obtain with a more open goal than the current attitude. I know
> > that at least two debian developpers (Michel and me) are also upstream
> > XFree86 developpers.
> 
> Yes, and how much work on the packages do you guys both do?

Thanks for your appreciation. How many patches have you been able to drop
from your packages due to my upstream work? Probably not too many yet, but
they illustrate the point.

As for actual packaging work, my suggestions based on upstream knowledge
tend to be ignored or even turned down with silly arguments, so I don't
bother too much.


Uploading 4.3.0 packages to sid may be a bad idea, but what about
experimental? I can think of a couple of candidates for sponsoring Daniel.


> > > I can do most everything but the porting. If anyone wants to port to any
> > > of the architectures listed above, *please* contact me. The Debian diffs
> > > most likely won't enter 4.3; 

We're officially forking XFree86 then? I wonder why the threat of another fork
caused such an uproar?

> > > myself and Mike Harris sat down and decided which patches to submit 
> > > upstream, and submitted them, before 4.3.0. A few got submitted, a few 
> > > got rejected, that's how it goes.

There's a bugzilla you could flood with patches now, and when they aren't
integrated after a while, you can say 'see how bad XFree86 upstream is,
they haven't integrated all these portability fixes!'... ;-P


> > > I have no intention of shooting for upstream commit access. You can, if
> > > you like. In the meantime, I'm just continuing to try and get my
> > > packages out as best as I can. That's all I can do.
> > 
> > Maybe i will, but like said, i am mostly a lowlevel driver guy, even if
> > i ever got commit access, it would be for that area only, as i really am
> > not enough familiar with the debian specialities. This may change in the
> > future though, depending on free time and such.
> 
> Well, what makes you think that *we're* likely to get global commit
> access, especially given XFree86's track record with dealing with
> distribution vendors?

I'm willing to put in my word for Branden at least.

 
-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer   \  Debian (powerpc), XFree86 and DRI developer
Software libre enthusiast  \     http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer



Reply to: