<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/07/2016 12:25 PM, Stéphane
Marchesin wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACP_E+Ju0Ey+g2h8yYT1CMOCdeY-jo7u1TjAvsnR0WyWBYw8Hw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr"><br>
On Apr 7, 2016 02:27, "Michel Dänzer" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:michel@daenzer.net"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:michel@daenzer.net">michel@daenzer.net</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 07.04.2016 18:01, Marek Olšák wrote:<br>
> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Ian Romanick <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:idr@freedesktop.org"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:idr@freedesktop.org">idr@freedesktop.org</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
> >> Why would you do that? I've NAKed this patch
several times.<br>
> ><br>
> > You NAKed the previous version of the patch, not this
one. I guess<br>
> > that means NAK for this one too.<br>
><br>
> I'd be interested in a specific justification for NAKing
this version.<br>
> Seems to me like this might be the best that can be done.</p>
<p dir="ltr">We asked ourselves the same question.</p>
<p dir="ltr">It is the best that can be done to fix glx 1.2 for
sure. But it will break glx 1.3, so for example it will break
chrome (I have a vested interest here :).</p>
<p dir="ltr">So what we figured out is, if we have to choose
between the old and new api, why break the newer (and arguably
better) one? Instead we should consider the old one
deprecated/legacy and move on.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Stéphane<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
How does this break glX 1.3, and how does this break Chrome?<br>
<br>
MM<br>
</body>
</html>