[cairo] Should cairo support xlib? (was: bug 4945: six months to fix a bug ?)

[Eric Faurot]

On 2/3/07, Marc Espie <espie at nerim.net> wrote:

> > What I don't want to do is:
> >
> > - provide fixes for every stable and experimental cairo releases if it
> >  is not getting anywhere.
>
> Well, getting the patch integrated ensures that you won't have to.
> Assuming cairo has one -stable branch (1.2.6 ?) and one -devel
> branch (1.3.x),

> all you have to do is make sure your patch gets in both branches
> (with some help from the cairo people).

> Then you may just need to catch up from time to time.


It all boils down to this.  I'd like the patch to be acceptable for
inclusion into cairo, in which case I can maintain it between cairo
releases.  But for that, I *really* need feedback from cairo devs.
Behdad, you apparently had something to constructive to say about it.
So please speak up.  Now, if a totally different approach is
requested, then I'll just keep maintaining my patch for OpenBSD until
it is actually done.

By the way I am testing a small change that seems to fix the few modes
which did not work in my previous mail.


> It's a fairly small price to pay. To open a comparison, this looks a
> hell of a lot easier than GCC contributions, where they don't accept
> contributions to the stable branches, where you have at least 3 or 4
> branches open at one time, where the rules to get something
> important in are decided by a committee who takes at least two
> months to give you a decision, where you have to wait for enough
> weeks to get a patch approved that you often have to reroll the
> patch because the stuff you wanted to affect was moved in-between,
> where you often have to rewrite a patch because it misses one space
> before a comma or the Changelog entry is not 100% perfect, and where
> you're often stranded because the -current tree you should test on
> happens to not compile on anything at the moment besides
> i386-linux-gnu because of some H.J.Lu's recent patch that he hasn't
> had the time to revert yet. Oh yes, and once your patch is in, you
> know that it's probably going to be at least one or two years before
> it trickles down to a -stable release...

Ok, I promise I won't complain too loud :).


Eric.