Jon Leech wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 03:41:40PM -0600, Stephen J Baker wrote:
> ...
> > However, there is one thing to be said for sticking with GL_HAS_GLEXT
> > (ugly though it is) and that is that it's already in the Mesa header
> > that shipped with XFree86 4.0.0 - so by changing it, we delay by one
> > whole XFree release the time at which we finally see an ABI compliant Mesa -
> > and there ends up being a bunch of SuSE 6.4 users with halfway compliant
> > code that could end up biting us for the next year or so.
>
> There is no ABI yet, so XFree86 4.0 cannot possibly be compliant.
>
> I'm sorry that the 4.0 deadline came before we finished this, but
> just because that happened doesn't mean that any particular
> implementation gets to unilaterally dictate. That is not how a standards
> process works, and it is entirely too short-term a view of things.
There's going to be an XFree86 4.0.1 release in the near future.
If we can resolve all this stuff in a PROMPT matter I'll be able
to submit it in time.
I believe the distros will be waiting for the 4.0.1 release, in the
interest of delivering a better product.
I doubt that anyone has started using GL_HAS_GLEXT and glext.h yet (or
even noticed its existance) so let's not let that weigh too heavily on
us. Mesa 3.3 hasn't even had a beta release yet either.
-Brian
