Proposal for integrating Looking Glass Xorg Mods into Xorg Release 7.1
Jay R. Ashworth
jra at baylink.com
Mon Dec 26 07:34:52 PST 2005
On Sun, Dec 25, 2005 at 12:03:51PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I'm sure if you came with this statement to the linux kernel list you'd
> get a happy entry into killfiles. If you integrate new optional code into
> an existing larget codebase the first priority should be that it doesn't
> make that codebase less maintainable. If that regresses your new
> feature that's fine because it's never been part of a release before and
> people don't have the high expectations as for the existing codebase.
It's fine to the *project* that it regresses his code, but it shouldn't
be *expected* to be fine to him. Sometimes, this won't be easy to
resolve, or quick. Sometimes, extensions will remain patches for a
long time for this reason.
This sounds more like a problem of Expectation Management than anything
technical, to me.
Jay R. Ashworth jra at baylink.com
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
"Space is called 'space' because there's so much *space* there."
- John Walker, of Fourmilab, on Trek's End
More information about the xorg