Hi,
I'm curious about the status of the Mesa-is-not-OpenGL issue. I've gotten
the impression that things are a little more relaxed with the library name
change, etc.
Specifically, this came up in the context of adding the mga GLX module to
Debian. Currently there are two conflicting Mesa packages (X and GGI) but
that doesn't scale. The obvious thing would be to have a "this
package provides OpenGL" line in each package that provides libGL,
and have clients just depend on "provides OpenGL". This is traditionally
how Debian handles such things. My question then is whether we can do with
with Mesa without implying that Mesa is a certified complient OpenGL(tm)
implementation. And if not, can anybody suggest an alternate name?
As you know, Debian is very concerned about "doing the right thing" in
these cases so it's important to be clear on whether this is ok.
Thanks,
-ralph
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Everything falls faster than an anvil.
_______________________________________________
Mesa-dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.mesa3d.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
