xc/programs considered harmful

[Alan Coopersmith]

John McCutchan wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 13:51 -0500, Leon Shiman wrote:
> 
>>Daniel -
>>
>>There  is a procedure already in place for deprecating ANY code. It is part 
>>of X.Org's commitment to stability of the code base.  The Architecture Group 
>>is the place to start; under Paul Anderson's chairmanship they are empowered 
>>to review and propose changes. You should write xorg_arch at x.org.
>>
> 
> 
> They should be reading and participating on this list then eh? Part of
> the reason for ditching XFree was to avoid this kind of closed circle of
> power wasn't it? I thought the community was going to decide the
> direction of X now. Considering that Daniel is one of the biggest
> participators in the X community, I guess not. 
> 

I believe most of the Architecture Board members are here - the community 
elected us and if Daniel wanted to run, he could have.   The lists are open and
we listen to opinions from everyone, but there still needs to be someone who
can make decisions when not everyone agrees, and it's hard to get away from
having some group like this.   (In reality, there's been little the Architecture
Board has had to do so far.  Most things have been working well by simple
consensus or discussions in forums like release-wranglers.)

The purpose of the separate list is simply traffic management - there are people
who want to participate in the high level architecture discussions without being
overwhelmed by all the mail of "how do I make _____ card work with ____ OS using
Xorg _____ ?" and similar discussions.   (There are times I think a -devel vs.
-users split would be good for similar reasons, others I think it has problems
in places where it lets the developers get isolated from what the users are
actually doing.)

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering