Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Feb 2006 12:22 UTC, submitted by Rahul
Permalink for comment 97507
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-12-18
"Why is it RedHat always seems to take a "not invented here" approach to advances developed outside of RedHat? I thought the idea of Fedora was to open up the geek-flavour of RHL to permit more involvement with the community"
This work started within Xorg team started long before Novell decided to take a different approach. So ask Novell instead of RH on this.
"All this appears to be is Yet Another Acceleration f X development. Could time be better spent on improving XGL, which (based on the notes in that thread) is more stable, applicable to more hardware, and a better implementation? "
You can continue to believe that code that is already is Xorg cvs is not stable compared to Novell closed development which has undergo no peer review or integration with the primary Xorg project.
"Or am I missing something"
Yes. You are barking up the wrong tree. Neither Red Hat nor Mandrake or any other organisation is working on XGL and has gone for a different approach. Novell basically decided to do closed development and wants everyone now to accept that.
http://lwn.net/Articles/171155/
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/metacity-devel-list/2006-February/ms...