xc/programs considered harmful

[Keith Packard]

Around 13 o'clock on Dec 17, Paul Anderson wrote:

> The original proposal for deprecation was really targeted
> more towards APIs rather than the physical location of code.

I didn't see anyone mentioning deprecating any code, only shuffling it out
of the monolithic tree to a quiet backwater where it could be released on a
more glacial pace as befitting its fosilized status (in the case of xlogo,
xclock et al) or acknowledging the external status of maintenence and
moving it within the monolithic tree to extras/  where all of the other non
locally maintained code goes.

Nor did I see anyone talking about shuffling the contents of the 6_8
branch, only HEAD which is where modularization is expected to take place.

It would be nice to have a clear plan in place for what X.org will release 
in the next year.  All we have at this point is a vague 'modularization 
someday' stance which isn't guiding us at all.  I know I'm not willing to 
help out with future monolithic releases, so at least I'll have the 
advantage of doing less work the longer the monolithic release train rolls.

-keith


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20041217/f85635e9/attachment.pgp>