xorg development questions and ideas

[Samuel Verstraete]

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:50:50 -0500
Terry Chan <tpchan at comcast.net> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 03:42:25PM +0200, Samuel Verstraete wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:36:33 +0200
> > Zbigniew Luszpinski <zbiggy at o2.pl> wrote:
> >
> > <<snip>>
> > >
> > > Replacing XOrg by XOrg7 is very bad idea in my opinion. There is a
> > > lot of work put in XOrg7(.1) by lunar devs and module works. But
> > > solving all the issues in this decentralised, huge project will
> > > take some time (mostly 'outside' dependencies compability).
> > > Instead I think it would be good to replace XOrg with XOrg-test.
> > > The XOrg is a little bit outdated at 6.8.2 version where
> > > XOrg-test is at more modern 6.9.0 one. I use XOrg-test almost
> > > since beginning and did not find any issues except some strange
> > > behaviour with symlinks generation at build script which causes
> > > sometimes loop. But this looks the same in both modules.
> >
> > AFAIK 6.9.0 is never released as a stable branch of the XOrg tree so
> > i'd vote against moving XOrg-test to Xorg... lets just delete
> > XOrg-test as the 6.9.0 tree is depreciated anyway.
> >
> > <<snip>>
> > <<double-snip>>
> 
> Wrong. See http://xorg.freedesktop.org/wiki/XorgReleases
> 
> XOrg-6.9.0 was released 2005-12-21.  Do NOT delete XOrg-test. I use
> XOrg-test and it works just fine.  I actually agree with Zbiggy and
> we should replace XOrg in moonbase with the contents of XOrg-test.
> 

Ok, sorry... didn't follow the 6.x tree that closely... for me it's ok
to move XOrg-test to XOrg then... But possibly some might still
disagree...
S.

> Terry Chan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lunar mailing list
> Lunar at lunar-linux.org
> http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/lunar