Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 17th Feb 2007 18:45 UTC, submitted by GhePeU
X11, Window Managers David Reveman writes: "I'd like to get all of you updated on the compiz related things discussed at the X developer conference that was held last week. My talk was mainly focused on 'what's next' and how to get desktop compositing in X to the next level." He also discussed the fork: "I had the chance to talk to Quinn Storm from the beryl project during xdevconf. I would have hoped that the current situation with beryl could be improved but it seems like Quinn at least isn't interested in that. However, after talking to Quinn it's very clear to me that the fork was partially motivated by assumptions that were wrong."
Thread beginning with comment 213897
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
sour grapes?
by jasutton on Sat 17th Feb 2007 20:48 UTC
jasutton
Member since:
2006-03-28

All the stuff he's said concerning Beryl seems to be rather embittered. I think just about everyone in the community realizes at this point that Beryl has been making improvements in leaps and bounds. David seems to have two main goals in his post:

1. To try to point out that Beryl's improvements have been "temporary solutions and workarounds." OK, but provide a little evidence before expecting people to believe this statement.

2. To claim that everyone is working on the fork, and not on Compiz, and that's not fair. Tough.

I enjoyed reading this choice statement in particular:

I'm sure that there's people involved in the beryl project that will sooner or later realize that they've made a mistake

This seems to say that people that chose to involve themselves in Beryl have made a mistake by doing so. This is jealousy at its finest. Insulting the developers isn't going to make them any more friendly toward Compiz.

I appreciate the work that's put into both projects, as they have made my Linux experience more fun, to say the least. But, I get sick when I read flame posts like this.

Reply Score: 5

RE: sour grapes?
by cmost on Sat 17th Feb 2007 21:14 in reply to "sour grapes?"
cmost Member since:
2006-07-16

Before I even read your comment I was thinking the exact same thing - sour grapes!! Like you, I say David hasn't provided much in the way of proof whatsoever to his allegations that Beryl is simply "feeding" off of projects they can't control, or using "temporary solutions and workarounds" which only make Beryl "appear" to work better. His entire attitude towards Quinn and Beryl seems juvenile. Dude, get over yourself!!! Beryl's developers are doing a great job! This is evidenced by the fact that many major distributions that are introducing compositing in their distros are using Beryl, not compiz. I also disliked the way that David was quick to add something nice right after he said something spiteful. I've always found that you have to watch your back around people like that or you might end up with a knife in it.

Edited 2007-02-17 21:16

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: sour grapes?
by apoclypse on Sat 17th Feb 2007 21:52 in reply to "RE: sour grapes?"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

First of all, Its not Sour grapes. The fact is that its well known that beryl currently uses a lot of hacks to get things to work in a perceived "better" manner. I'm not going to give you any evidence, I don't have to, thats what Google is for. The evidence is right in his message. Input redirection is just making it into the x server, how is beryl doing this already? They certainly don't have input redirection working properly. There are other things that he mentions in his message that he is currently working on getting the x server patched for atm and here beryl has these "implemented". We all know the amount of work Berly had to to to untie it from that god awful beryl manager, something that shouldn't have happened to begin with. Beryl is a hack, and its full hacks that work but in the long run they are going to have to get rid of these hacks and guess where they are going to get their stuff from then. Yep, they are going to do what they currently do which is take code from Compiz.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: sour grapes?
by g2devi on Sat 17th Feb 2007 22:03 in reply to "sour grapes?"
g2devi Member since:
2005-07-09

It does sound that way. Some of the things he says makes sense (e.g. keeping the MIT license so as to allow code to be moved into X.org), but it does seem that he is out of touch with Beryl and just plain FUDful (e.g. willing to accept code without too many questions and references to kludge after kludge). There's also mention that Beryl continues to use Compiz code and doesn't give back, but no mention that Beryl plugins have been ported into compiz-extra by Compiz developers (at least according to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryl_%28window_manager%29
)

Here's a view from the other side of the fence:
http://dev.beryl-project.org/~kristian/beryl/7/the-future-of-beryl/

You don't have to look too far to find it. It's directly on the main Beryl page in the "Planet" section.

Given the Beryl link and the Compiz link, my uninformed impression is that the real reason for the fork is something glossed on by both sides:

1) the Compiz team what's their code to get into X.org and so they try to make it compatible with the X.org low level code.

2) low level X.org code is overly complicated out because of it's generality and the Beryl developers don't see the reason for the complexity if all you want to have is a window manager. That complexity makes it harder for new people to join Beryl so they want to spend a lot of time refactoring the code to make it easier for new people to contribute. The Beryl team also found other places that limited contribution and started working on reducing those.

The result? More people contribute to Beryl that would have with Compiz, and some plugins have been ported back to Compiz giving more plugins than would otherwise be the place, and finally some compiz work has (or will) get into X.org which in turn allow Beryl to become better.

My own prediction is that Compiz will eventually disappear since the Compiz team's dream seems to be moving it's code into X.org. This in turn will give Metacity and KWin the ability to catch up to Beryl in most aspected except for support for multiple decorators and multiple configuration managers.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: sour grapes?
by GhePeU on Sat 17th Feb 2007 22:39 in reply to "RE: sour grapes?"
GhePeU Member since:
2005-07-06

1) the Compiz team what's their code to get into X.org and so they try to make it compatible with the X.org low level code.

2) low level X.org code is overly complicated out because of it's generality and the Beryl developers don't see the reason for the complexity if all you want to have is a window manager. That complexity makes it harder for new people to join Beryl so they want to spend a lot of time refactoring the code to make it easier for new people to contribute. The Beryl team also found other places that limited contribution and started working on reducing those.


Oh, please, compiz/beryl need GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap, the composite extension, AIGLX, and where do you think all these things live? In the X.org code and in the DRI/nvidia driver code! there was no way to implement the 3d effects without those things. Then, when those thing were implemented in the proper xserver you could have those nice 3d effects. The input redirection is the same, to have more advanced effects you just need the infrastructure in the X server. Or you can use a ugly hack, and we all know that ugly hacks are evil.

On the compiz/beryl fork: David Reveman pretty much single-handedly wrote XGL and the first composite manager with 3d effects, and helped to define all the necessary specifics. If I have to choose, I trust him, not the beryl developers, who regularly "sync" to put in beryl the new compiz features and code without publicly acknowledging it.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: sour grapes?
by kondzior.p@gmail.com on Sun 18th Feb 2007 01:22 in reply to "sour grapes?"
kondzior.p@gmail.com Member since:
2007-02-18

1. To try to point out that Beryl's improvements have been "temporary solutions and workarounds." OK, but provide a little evidence before expecting people to believe this statement.

2. To claim that everyone is working on the fork, and not on Compiz, and that's not fair. Tough.


AD. 1 I think much of evidences was submited in that letter good example is input redirection, anather could be fragment program attirbute that was acctually ported by beryl developers to beryl from compiz few days ago, if beryl have blurfx why they port this ? If Kristian Lyngstøl thinks that compiz code provided by David is so bad ? (And he dont give any evidences for that:/) Why other beryl devs still "branch" compiz ? If he thinks it is bad he shuld show code that will fix right ?

AD. 2 Well i think you must go hear http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xorg/app/compiz.git;a=blob;h=47d29...
its pretty long list imho.

Most of Beryl users seems to dont see the main problem that David is trying to touch.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: sour grapes?
by molnarcs on Sun 18th Feb 2007 01:49 in reply to "RE: sour grapes?"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

Yes - as much as I like beryl (I use beryl instead of compiz because there is no port for the new compiz GUI in FreeBSD, and I hate gconf) I must say that the real work is still done by David - like the solution you referred to.

Beryl went from beta stage to rc stage. I expect software in the beta stage to stabilize over time: no extensive changes, no new functionality, fixing bugs and stabilizing the code, that's what BETAs and especially RCs are for. And yet, this is not what's happening. RC1 was a huge regression over Beta2 - our port maintainer had to disable a newly introduced plugin because it instantly crashed the wm. Just browse through the posts on beryl-projects forum to see what I'm talking about, or see the comments below the RC2 announcment: http://pricechild.co.uk/?p=38 People are actually now downgrading to BETA releases, because they are more stable than RCs - this is unheard of, and quite ridiculous.

The fact that beryl devs frantically import extensive changes from compiz at such late RC stages speaks volumes of the importance (and quality) of the work done by David! Please, even if you like beryl (just like I do), have at least the respect for him that he deserves for his work, and don't mock him with "sour grapes" kinda comments - it is unfair.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: sour grapes?
by butters on Sun 18th Feb 2007 03:32 in reply to "sour grapes?"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

All the stuff he's said concerning Beryl seems to be rather embittered. I think just about everyone in the community realizes at this point that Beryl has been making improvements in leaps and bounds.

The only thing that can derail the free software desktop's continued downhill battle is short-sightedness of this sort. Hacks are for getting projects off the ground and people involved. Once a project reaches the state where people are blathering about it on OSNews, hacks should be out of the question. Recently Ubuntu pulled composited window management out of Feisty. Why? Because too many hacks make it too unreliable for most people.

I appreciate Quinn's contribution with Beryl. It got a lot of people interested in desktop effects and showed those big desktop OS vendors that we're right on their tails. But Beryl is a demo. It's an overly aggressive showcase of where we'd like to take desktop effects over the next several months. And for this purpose, Beryl has been wildly successful.

However, Beryl's job is becoming less and less important now that we are painfully aware of how much we want those sweet desktop effects. Now we want it on our systems, and we want it to work properly. I'm sure many of you Beryl supporters have gotten it to work more-or-less reliably on your systems, but you're kidding yourself if you honestly believe it's ready for default installations. It's close, but no cigar.

If you're an end-user, by all means, continue using Beryl. It arguably works better than Compiz at this point in time. But you must realize that it is a short-term fix for problems that Compiz will solve correctly in the 6-18 month timeframe. The real development is happening in the Compiz project. The Beryl project offers a fleeting glimpse into the relatively near future--and not much else.

Anyone who knows anything about X development knows that developers like David Reveman, Keith Packard, and Jon Smirl have more talent in their pinky fingers than Quinn Storm and his (not a female, btw) posse have all together. Enough talent to realize how to do things the right way.

I'm sure that there's people involved in the beryl project that will sooner or later realize that they've made a mistake

He's right. When the Compiz project moves forward with their roadmap, there won't be anything to distinguish Beryl save for its shaky foundations.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: sour grapes?
by Yagami on Sun 18th Feb 2007 17:07 in reply to "RE: sour grapes?"
Yagami Member since:
2006-07-15

you are , of course ,right indeed.

the work d.r. is doing is of very importance.

but why is it a mistake beryl ?

people should do what they want ! they want to do beryl , and its working bery well for them.
in contrast , D.R. is doing background work, but foreground work ( compiz ) sucks big time.

to me , neither compiz nor beryl matter .... the only thing that matters is D. R. work on Xorg.

why people forget that beryl dev's are doing it for fun , to learn new stuf... they are people , individuals.if they are happy , what is the problem ?

beryl is also doing very important stuff... they are testing and making important usuability tests. other desktops ( as kde / gnome / compiz ) can learn from this, and see what users want.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: sour grapes?
by subterrific on Mon 19th Feb 2007 09:52 in reply to "RE: sour grapes?"
subterrific Member since:
2005-07-10

David Reveman, Keith Packard, and Jon Smirl deserve everyones support for the amazing work they have done to enable applications like Beryl. There aren't many people with the skills and vision of these 3, and I think that is where some of the misunderstands come from. It is apparent that David would rather have people help him on long term solutions than implement short term patches like EXA and Beryl. However, it is difficult for new people to jump into projects like Compiz, Xgl, Cario, glitz, Xorg, etc that often don't produce visual results to users for years. Beryl might be the stepping stone new developers need to get involved with some of these long term projects and they need to be provided with helpful mentoring, not treated as outcasts. I believe that is what David is trying to say, but he comes off as a little defensive. I appreciate the work being done by both groups and I hope they work together in the future.

Reply Parent Score: 2