[RFC] App deprecation
dickey at radix.net
Sun Apr 8 05:28:51 PDT 2007
On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 11:16:39AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 07:48:39PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 01:36:28AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > We're stretched as it is, and I don't think we need to pretend like
> > > we're maintaining a full application suite. Some of these would be
> > Well, either Xorg has "lots more developers" as claimed by some posters
> > earlier this week, or they don't. Be consistent.
> I've never claimed that, so I don't know why you expect me to be
> 'consistent' with other people, but we do not have a large number of
indeed. There are several factions who have different goals.
It's interesting that they don't communicate with each other on this list.
> developers, relative to our codebase. Either way, the petty sniping
> isn't overly productive, or endearing.
> Would you like to maintain these apps?
hmm - perhaps. Not on your schedule, however. But you were aware of that.
Back to the point: you are being inconsistent in more than one way.
(Besides not responding to my first comment...)
Another aspect in this thread is proposing to keep twm while removing
most of the useful utilities (xload, xclock) which people who are't
using one of the 2-3 major desktop factions.
Another aspect - losing the utilities will make Xorg no longer a reference
implementation for the libraries, since there are no examples of its
Thomas E. Dickey
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the xorg