Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
The last VIA-specific change was done sep 7th. If I check out a sep 8th drm and compile the via module, at least I can do 4 modprobs and rmmods before a kernel Oops. The big problem is that users are starting to report problems also when the X server initializes and they are not always reproducable.
IMHO there is a need for a reasonably stable branch, and, again IMHO, it should be the trunk.
Two points from the CVS policy page:
# All code development is to be done on CVS <http://dri.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/CVS> branches, not the trunk.
# Branches are not merged into the trunk until the code as been well tested.
Since our CVS situation has changed, the policy has also changed. The docs, unfortunately, have not. As near as I can tell, the situation is as follows:
- Client-side driver development happens in the Mesa CVS trunk. Stable code lives in a branch.
- DRM driver development happens in the DRI CVS trunk. Stable code lives in the kernel tree.
- Any code not covered by the previous two rules follows whatever the X.org policy is.
Based on that, how does the currently shipping kernel (2.6.8.1 still, right?) fare?
I know I'm not a big contributor to dri / drm and may not have a big say,
but with user complaints about kernel oopses piling up on the unichrome lists, the situation is becoming
troublesome.
There are basically 3 classes of users. There are the people that just want it to work, but don't care (as much) about performance, new features, etc. Those users should just use their kernel of choice and their X-server release of choice. I think those users are okay now.
The second group are the people the opposite end of the spectrum. They want the latest features and best performance at all costs. They're willing to take some chances. "Bleeding edge", if you will. These are the people that should use current CVS (or the nightly snapshots). They get what they get.
The third group are the people in the middle. They want the latest stable updates. I think this is the largest group, and it is also the group that getting the short-end of things right now. We've had discussions about "those people" in the past, but we've never come to any firm conclusions. I've always liked the idea of, once a month, picking the "known best" nightly snapshot and marking it as the stable build. The only problem is that requires a certain amount of manpower, and nobody has had / taken the time.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
