<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.32.2"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 20:56 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <TT>> I'll take this opportunity to advocate that the xcb source repositories</TT> <TT>> should be relocated under /xorg if feasible. These are the only</TT> <TT>> externally recognizable hints that xcb is part of x.org project. That</TT> <TT>> would be helpful to direct comments/bug reports to the correct location.</TT> <TT>> </TT> <TT>I'm not sure what the perceived benefit is, can you explain?</TT> </BLOCKQUOTE> I am taking the view point of new or occasional contributors. Each project has policies, be it software license, development process, architecture directions,  build tools requirement and so on. It takes some digging to find what those policies are. That is assuming the person knows to which project a piece code belongs to. Currently there is no way for a person to "discover" that xcb is hosted by xorg. If you specifically ask the question, sure, one can find out, eventually. Even more so, looking at the cgit web browser, it is explicitly listed outside of the xorg. Which information is correct? Has xcb just been separated from xorg? I was not around at the time xcb started. I assume that it grew over time and proved it's usefulness. During that period of time, it got more and more integrated  to the point were it looks like it is part of project. When the day comes where it is officially merged into the larger project, one can ask why it is needed. Perhaps it is a sign of success. All is left to do now is to tie a few loose ends and make it look as if it had always been in there. If we don't, people will be asking "why is xcb component the only one not under xorg"? for decades... </BODY> </HTML>