[Xprint] Re: Modularization proposal updated

[Daniel Stone]

On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 05:48:58PM +0200, Julien Lafon wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2005 12:09 AM, Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> wrote:
> > Kevin E Martin wrote:
> > > I think this is a good reason why the default is currently to build
> > > separate video and print servers.
> 
> I missed parts of the conversation - can you explain why do you think
> that separate video and print servers would be a good idea?

This is how it is currently -- I think the onus would be on the people
pushing for the unified server to make a very, very clear and strong
case (I have seen the arguments been made, but I have not seen a clear,
straightforward argument), and then for those who believe this is a bad
idea to rebut it.  There would have to be a clear proposal for it to be
properly rebutted.  Maybe you could do this, Julien?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-modular/attachments/20050413/b3fede09/attachment.pgp