From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2001-04-19 08:04:15
|
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:57:58PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote: > "David S. Miller" wrote: > > > > James Simmons writes: > > > The Linux GFX project grew out the need for a higher performance X > > > server that has a much faster developement cycle. In the last few years > > > the graphics card and multimedia environments have grow at such a rate > > > the current X solutions can no longer keep pace nor do they focus on > > > producing high performance X servers specifically for linux. Also the > > > community has demanded for specific functionality which has never come to > > > light. > > > > And this specific functionality is? > > > > I think this is not a worthwhile project at all. The X tree, it's > > assosciated protocols and APIs, are complicated enough as it is, and > > the xfree86 project has some of the most talented and capable people > > in this area. It would be a step backwards to do things outside of > > xfree86 development. > > > > If the issue is that "things don't happen fast enough in the xfree86 > > tree", why not lend them a hand and submitting patches to them instead > > of complaining? > > Yes, David, I concur. > > James, please just pitch in and help XFree86 evolve faster. > There are drivers that need to be "Render" extension enabled. Sure, but if there was a Render documentation or something such, things would be much easier. > There's more work to do on fleshing out the Render extension. > I am sure that Kieth Packard would be grateful for any > worthwhile contributions. > > If you are thinking that you'll provide better accellerated > graphics rendering performance, I'd love to know how you plan > to accomplish this. AFAIK, the main impediment to XFree86 > giving really good accelleration support for a broad array > of hardware is the lack of technical documentation from the > manufacturers. Unless you plan on trying to get hardware Well, in doing fbdev drivers you already solve this kind of problems. > manufactures to have you develop their closed-source drivers > for them, I don't see how you'll be able to do any better closed source driver are evil anyway, so don't worry about those. > than the XFree86 organization is already doing. > > XFree86 evolves in a measured way as a result of many > competing needs. Backward compatibility is needed for the > huge installed base of legacy apps. For the various > development toolkits (KDE, Gnome, etc.) there is a rapid > move toward using the Render and "Resize and Rotate" > extensions. These extensions will make all sorts of cool > rendering functionality available to the applications that > use these toolkits (alpha blending, anti-aliased fonts and > so on). > > I'd love to hear you enumerate all the shortcomings that you > believe need to be addressed. Also, please CC: de...@xf.... > At least give the competition an opportunity to win over the > support of the developers you'd like to pull away from > XFree86 work! I think the main critic (guessing from his announcement) is the interaction between the console system and xfree86, as well as the multi-head/keyboard/whatever handling, but let's hear what james has to say about it. Friendly, Sven Luther |