> I mean, is there any schedule on when a new release of GGI/KGI is going
> to happen?
Hmm - Marcus: How is your current schedule ? We should probably finally whip
up a new LibGGI release.
> * Is going KGI to be integrated in the new 2.4x kernel series?
No.
> If not, why?
Hmm - Steffen what is your status ? Still working, or did you quit ?
Other than Steffen's KGI, we simply don't have a reasonable graphics layer
that would make sense to include in the kernel. Kgicon is basically just
another (more portable to alien systems) way to write framebuffer drivers.
Nothing _Linux_ would need.
> and should the GGI team develop a branch of the kernel?
If someone wants to do this, it might make sense. We maintained patches for
a long time a long while ago, but as noone seemed to be too interested,
we started lagging behind kernel changes and finally stopped updating stuff.
> Why doesn't Linus want KGI inside the kernel sources?.
The data about this topic is very dated. I wouldn't count on that still
being the case, with stuff like DRI also getting its helper modules in.
> Has anybody on the GGI team talked to any distribution in the hope of
> including GGI/KGI in the next releases as basis of them?
We'd need a non-beta release first. Marcus ?
> * How well are the relationships with the X team?
Traditionally they haven't been very good. Though we got some nice
invitations later to help working on the XFree-4.x series. However noone
here took the opportunity - or rather the big amount of work coupled to it
...
> Is there a remote possibility of having X working someday over GGI?
XGGI works fine for me.
> And DRI? Is DRI possible under GGI?
Noone has tried yet. According to Steffen DRI is something one shouldn't
really try ...
> Is GGI/KGI ending as a curiosity - another kind of graphics library - ,
I am afraid it will - regarding Linux.
> or does it have a future as a basic part of Linux?
It has a future, but I assume it will rather be in the embedded systems
market. It's used quite some there .... ;-).
Yeah, I know - all that sounds pretty pessimistic. And I always feel pretty
sad, when it comes to that topic. GGI is "my baby" more than any other open
source project. And there is quite some blood, sweat and tears I and several
other people put into it, so it really hurts to see it fall in decay. I'm
pretty busy these days juggling two jobs, so I don't have so much time left
to work on GGI. While this is bad for GGI, it helps a little to distract me
from my "broken heart" about the project's state.
But maybe some folks here would like to cheer me up a little ?
What GGI needs is a driving force. Look at the mailing list. It's quiet.
Really quiet. The only postings are a few newbies seeking help or asking for
features, and from time to time, me, Marcus or a few others that annouce
a little new feature they coded up, because _they_ needed it.
Come one folks ! A project as big as GGI doesn't live by half a dozen
semi-active coders. At least we need some _motivation_.
Tell us what you need, tell us _that_ you need it, give us a hand
implementing it, report bugs, and so on !
CU, ANdy
--
= Andreas Beck | Email : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
