Glucose status/instructions request, (and notes on stale branches)

Alan Hourihane alanh at
Thu Oct 18 13:48:04 PDT 2007

On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 13:25 -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 21:00 +0100, Alan Hourihane wrote:
> > Suppressing this code is not the answer, and the last statement shows
> > it's just your opinion, which shouldn't be the overriding factor here.
> I'm not suppressing any code; it's in the repository. I just don't want
> to have it land on master yet. I spend a lot of time getting users
> unstuck from their configuration mistakes when they expect that anything
> on master should 'just work'. Right now, we're mostly teaching them to
> not use our current code base; I'd like to fix that so that we have more
> people running master.

But you are veto'ing a merge, for your own personal gain of not having
to support your users. That's still suppressing it from master. 

> > As you say, you can only encourage OS distributions to ship fewer
> > options, but suppressing the ability in the first place isn't the
> > answer.
> Anyone is welcome to pull from the glucose branch if they like; pulling
> from 'not master' will give them a good idea of what to expect in terms
> of stability.

What I'm also concerned about is what else you veto in favour of your
terms. Where does that kind of argument end ?


More information about the xorg mailing list