On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Vladimir Dergachev wrote: >> Where hardware is concerned, such as the video drivers, I would >> agree. More often than not, having the hardware documentation is >> required, or is at least quite helpful. However, the entire >> XFree86 sources contain libraries, extensions, applications, >> fonts, documentation, and many other things - all of which >> other potential developers could volunteer to work on too, >> without requiring hardware documentation. > >They could volunteer to work on it, yes. However a good many of open >source efforts starts with need to scratch your own itch. All I am saying >is that hardware-independent itch can be scratched without messing with >Xserver internals.
Absolutely. >> The Linux kernel for example has a very large source code base, >> and has countless developers whom have worked on it under the >> Bazaar model, and the code is quite high quality. People write >> good patches, and people write bad patches regardless of what >> model of development is used. However, I think that due to the >> bazaar style of development the kernel is done under, the bad >> patches get weeded out much more easily, whereas with the >> cathedral style of development, they're more likely to simply get >> ignored or cast aside. >> >> Is that similar to what you mean? > >This seems to be another angle ;) My point was that the easier it is for >patches to go in the more attractive the project looks to new developers. I couldn't agree with you more. -- Mike A. Harris _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
