On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 07:44, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 23:17 -0700, Eric Anholt wrote: > > I would like to see a merge from DRI CVS to X.Org in the near future. > > Is there any opposition to this? > > No opposition, but a concern: Where are we going to integrate the DRI > with the Composite extension, in the X.Org or DRI tree? I'd be in favour > of moving the DRI tree to a branch of the X.Org tree altogether, but I'd > like to hear what other people's current opinions are on this.
I was hoping that DRI work on pbuffers might go quickly and have the drivers ready for rendering to targets besides the screen, which is what we really need for Composite support. The other thing would be Damage, but that'll be easy I think. I assume this would be done in the tree where Composite gets integrated first, but again, I don't expect it to be too hard if we can render to other targets. I am definitely in favor of the DRI X tree stuff being a branch on the X.Org tree. -- Eric Anholt [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
