[SCM TRANSITION] Re: Proposal: move Randr protocol and library to git

Shawn Starr shawn.starr at rogers.com
Tue Apr 18 07:42:15 PDT 2006

I strongly disagree. Unless you want to write scripts to handle SCM(n). If the core Xorg libs/proto stuff moves to git, we might as well move all of the Xorg pieces to git. Modularization doesn't mean making buiding/developing on X even more difficult. I fully agree with Egbert. Either you pick one or you'll seriously impact X development.


----- Original Message ----
From: Diego Calleja <diegocalleja at gmail.com>
To: xorg at lists.freedesktop.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:53:06 AM
Subject: Re: [SCM TRANSITION] Re: Proposal: move Randr protocol and library to git

El Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:08:00 +0200,
Egbert Eich <eich at suse.de> escribió:

> - To take advantage of a new and improved API a user may have to
>   upgrade numerous modules at once.

>From my own user perspective this doesn't matters that much. If you're
an user and you're trying new things you may need to download projects
not hosted in fdo.org, ej: kernel snapshots when dealing with drm or a
metacity version featuring some new feature. And from a user perspective
using several SCMs is not an issue at all, since you just do "cvs update",
"git pull", "svn whatever" or switch branches if anything. Also, for a 
user the code is read-only, so it's possible to use git -> cvs gateways
if using several SCMs gets to be a problem.
xorg mailing list
xorg at lists.freedesktop.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20060418/5b6756a5/attachment.html>

More information about the xorg mailing list