Ok here you go.. I apologize for that... 2007/2/23, Kristian Lyngstøl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The difference between Compiz and Beryl is still quite small, neither > project has made any great architectural advances during the last few > months. And luckily for us, we have taken the effort of keeping > up-to-date with important compiz changes, the same is not true the > other way around. So how exactly would a merge happen, practically > speaking? It's not a matter of just porting a few patches or doing a > diff. Would we use Beryl as the base, or Compiz? Either way, it would > require quite some time.
AFAIK the idea was taking the core of Compiz and applying some patches to it. (berylsettings, multihead, etc) The plugins would be taken from Beryl. Most of us know that this would need some really heavy work happening to make the plugins compatible with Compiz-Core again. (IPCS for example) > "The number of people who are interested in text-based configuration > support is very limited. Giving a few thousand SLED users a good user > experience has higher priority for me than implementing something that > a few users that hang out on the forum wants. I hope you can respect > that." > > No, I'm sorry, but I can't respect that because I simply don't belive > it's true. The fact that clue-less people are willing to accept > anything that works doesn't make it a good solution, which Reveman so > often reminds us when he describes our work more or less as a set of > dirty hacks. GConf may be nice if you actually want something like > that, but a lot of people don't. Beryl has dealt with that, and has > never gotten any bad reviews due to the settings system, even when we > didn't have gconf support. Not from objective sources anyway. > I don't think there will be any cooperation without the use of libberylsettings. It's just too important to the beryl project and its community and somehow its a part if its identity. What would beryl be without BSM? Gconf might be nice for some people, but its not really productive for every-day-use. (At least not for me) > If you read between the lines of David Reveman's mails with Robert > (Which I will not quote here as they were not sent to me, merely > pasted), he wants each author to retain control over whatever he or > she wrote. Because that's how it's done in the Free Software Community > apparantly. Well, that's not acceptable to me at this point. That is > exactly why the fork happened in the first place. In the Beryl > Project, we work as a team. One person may hold a copyright on a piece > of code, but he does not have a veto on what patches goes in. Sure, we > discuss with the author (if he's on the team) before making > significant changes, but in the end, the original author doesn't hold > complete control. The council does. While the idea of each author > controling his code sounds "fair enough", it will effectivly give > Reveman full control over the code, since he is the original author. > He knows this, I wonder if Robert realise this, I hope he will now. > While it is important to respect the work of the original author, I > don't belive it is reasonable at this point that one person holds > complete control. We allready tried that, it didn't work. If Reveman > had the leadership abilities needed to pull that off, then there > wouldn't have been a fork in the first place, but he has shown that > he's unable to cooperate sufficiently. Yeah another point major point. If he can't accept to lose his total control over the project we are basically done with him. Even if he has written most of the code, he has to work in a team with us to get this working. > Also, there is the matter of a license. > > I am a firm beliver in the GPL. > > .... > > I don't see how using the GPL would limit anything. Several window > managers are GPL. And to be honest, I don't want people to abuse the > freedom that free software grants you. The discussion between copyleft > and non-copyleft licenses doesn't belong here, there are plenty of > flame wars about that going on. But for me personally, using a > non-copyleft license is something I would rather avoid. The fact that > Reveman refuses to see that there are good reasons for the GPL, even > if he might not agree with them, is not a good sign. The MIT license > is one of the things he seem to insist upon in the e-mails he > exchanged with Robert. I'm flexible with that. I personally prefer GPL, but it it would mean that much to him, it's ok. > Also, I question Reveman's competence in moral dilemmas, which a > license essentialy is. Recently, Ben Reeves, also known as > "Zootreeves", the site administrator of the Compiz forums (at the > time), was caught red-handed breaking into a Beryl server and > performing sabotage. I feel it is crucially important to condem this > kind of behavior. It is unacceptable for community leaders to behave > this way. The Beryl Project was kind enough not to press charges > hoping for a public apology, and if you ask me, no such thing has > happened. And Reveman has not even commented on the situation which > was experienced as grave, considering the fragile relationship between > the Compiz and Beryl communities. Is a man who doesn't seem to care at > all when another high profile member of his project breaks the law in > an attempt to damage the oposition, really fit to comment on moral > dilemmas? On what's right and wrong? Or even lead a project? It seems > to me, Reveman only comments on right and wrong when it is in his > benefit. Open-Source politics might not be his favourite subject, I'm basically ok with that. He is not responsible for the "work" of Zootreeves. Maybe he is in moral but lets keep this discussion technical and not emotional. > I understand perfectly well that Reveman doesn't use web forums, I > don't really like to use them much myself either to be honest. But > when there are a handfull of compiz community members who seem to > worship Reveman, and uses his statements and actions as ammunition for > their fire, I feel it would be the right thing to do for him to > intervene. He wouldn't have to agree with anyone at all, just stop the > flames. He is pretty much the only person that can do that at this > point, yet he either doesn't care at all about the vocal part of his > community, or he likes to see flame wars started by his followers. > Yes, followers, because that's what they are. They seem to treat him > as a god, and he lets them do this. Yeah, but again it's not really David's fault that childish trolls from his community act like that. What should he say? "Stop praising me as you god?" It's actually quite funny reading through the compiz forum so if its for entertainment... ;-) > I belive this attitude would be a real obstacle for the team. It would > make it impossible to do anything without Reveman agreeing. It would > put Reveman's opinions over the wishes of the majority. Just like it > was prior to the fork. Again, this case would be unacceptable and IMO nobody on the beryl project would work under this conditions. I hope I could make my point clear, even if not the best English. ;-) Regards, Patrick _______________________________________________ beryl-dev mailing list beryl-dev@lists.beryl-project.org http://lists.beryl-project.org/mailman/listinfo/beryl-dev
