Modular X.org and the Unichrome forks.

[Xavier Bachelot]

> Once the new code supports everything the old code does, then perhaps
> there should be a discussion and some planning around best options.
> Until then it seems people are jumping the gun and X should just ship
> openchrome so that users don't suffer.
> 
> Alan
> 
+1. That's exactly the opinion I expressed in the different *chrome list 
before.

First, we (the end users) need functionalities. The beauty of the code 
is a developper matter, and whilst it is indeed an important one, in 
order to ease the maintainers work and improve stability, it should not 
prevent the hardware from being useful. This can be addressed without 
breaking support for a wide range of chipsets (unichrome pro) or 
important features like XvMC.

unichrome.sf.net code is heading at sanitizing the code, which is fine. 
openchrome.org code is heading at supporting as many features and 
hardware as possible, which is also fine. What is not fine is that it is 
2 projects, not because of technical difficulties, but because of 
relationship between people, and failure to work as a team, which means 
duplicated work and  wasted time for the developpers and confusion for 
the end users. That is not the spirit of the OSS community and hence is 
not benefiting it.

This said with all respect due to all the *chrome developpers for their 
respective work.

Regards,

Xavier