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 214269
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: sour grapes?
by apoclypse on Mon 19th Feb 2007 01:21 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: sour grapes?"
Member since:

Its not laughable, its closer to the truth than you think. The truth is that compiz when first created was a proof of concept, a prototype showing how a compositing manager should be implemented. The project took off and quinnstorm really needs credit for that as a lot of interest stemmed from that compiz branch. the issue is that regardless of what teh end user thinks, this isn't closed source software where the end justifies the means. Opensource software isn't afraid to rewrite a huge amounts of code just to clean it up, instead of piling hacks upon hacks. Beryl is hackish, it uses hacks to get things kind of working, but not properly and the real end result is that unlike compiz other window managers can't benefit from the work done in beryl. the patches the Dave is adding to the xserver will benefit any window manager that needs it not just compiz. Thats important and it shows you how selfish the beryl project has been. The licensing being the most major screw up.

Reply Parent Score: 2