On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 06:50 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
> The number of apps which PEX, MIT_SUNDRY, and Ximage is probably a rather
> small number but certainly there have been apps written to use it. As for
> Xfree86-misc, I have heard that some modern screensavers use it to provide
> some feature that makes the screensaver work in a better manner and there has
> been concern over the disruption in useability this will cause. xscreensaver
> uses this extension. So yes removing it is a really bad idea.
>
> I dont think that backwards compatability code should be removed "just
> because we dont dont think anyone uses it anymore", or "because we can". As
> far as I am aware these extensions were not causing any problems and I cannot
> see the justification to remove them. One of the prime missions of the X.org
> project should be to maintain backwards compatability with the X11 protocol
> and with extensions for applications which need them. We cannot make
> assumptions that there are not applications that uses these extensions which
> have been there for years.
>
Are you volunteering to maintain them? The largest user base of X
doesn't appear to be having compatibility issues with their removal (now
Linux), and without data of what their removal may be affecting and/or a
volunteer to maintain them, it seems our effort should go elsewhere.
So please, concrete examples of what breaks, and help in maintenance,
are the solution here.
Best Regards,
- Jim
--
Jim Gettys <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
xorg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
