xc/programs considered harmful

[Keith Packard]

Around 15 o'clock on Dec 17, Owen Taylor wrote:

> What really disappoints me here is that modularization has been 
> discussed, experimented with, tried out for several years, and nobody
> has sat down and wrote down a concrete plan for:
> 
>  - How will the code be structured in CVS
>  - What will be the released tarballs
>  - What are the stages for moving code to match 

This is putting the cart before the horse.  Until we have an actual 
commitment from X.org (however that is done) that release 'foo' will be 
modular, any planning for modularization is strictly navel gazing.

We have to get help from everyone involved, even those vehemently 
opposed to modularization, to make sure the system will work for them.  
Right now, we just hear about how 'environment foo' or 'system bar' will 
break irrepairibly as a result of modularization instead of patches to 
make it work again.

There's no way we can get rough concensus about how modularization should 
work until we have rough concensus that it should happen at all.

-keith


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20041217/a9b41428/attachment.pgp>