> > I'm also worried about proposed changes to things like Mesa will have > to go through the proper channels (Brian) and will take some > discussion (especially new GLX extensions). These sort of > architectural decisions are not something that everyone will go "ah > Novell said it is okay, we'll just put it in the tree", and I would > rather these things are discussed in the open with people who know the > stuff a lot better than I or Novell. I don't see what you can lose > about having these discussions now rather than later, in fact you'll > lose traction later as you'll have to maintain any GLX extensions you > do privately for a long time if you don't go and get some community > approval to have them in Mesa. >
And if Novell want an example of where this sort of thing has backfired before, I'll point out the wonderful Novell Linux Kernel Debugger, developed in-house behind closed doors, and never going to get merged into the mainline kernel as the community just didn't agree with it. Hopefully someone in Novell has learned from that. (considering someone has to spend a lot of time keeping NLKD up to date with newer kernels..) Dave. _______________________________________________ Desktop_architects mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects
