linuxconsole-dev

Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Next step

[James S. <jsi...@li...>]

>you are forking the XFree86, is that the wisest course ? Do you have
>enough manpower and coding time as compared to the Xfree86 team ?

Not forking. Starting from scratch. We don't plan to stick with the MIT
sample implementation for long. New build system, the whole nine yards. 
For several months several dozen developers have been exchange emails
planning this. 

>Could you please explain a bit more about the reasons of this, and
>explain why it is a better course than working with the Xfree code, and
>adapting it to our needs.

We feel the catherdal method of developement of XFree86 is going to hurt
linux in the long run. We need something to evolve as fast or faster than
linux. Also XFree86 design goal is to work everywhere. You have to pay a
price for this. We are not so ambitious. 

Re: Next step

[James S. <jsi...@li...>]

>I really think that this more of a step side-ways then forward, we need
>to drop X. Why not set out to make a windowing system that can run ontop
>of GFX or KGI?. X is old and should be shot. We need a new windowing
>system that doesn't need a nasty hack that breaks the protocol to support
>things like alpha blending and AA-fonts. Who cares about supporting
>legacy X applications? The future market is only going to be concerned
>with gnome and kde. gtk and qt could quickly be ported over to this new
>system. X is old and can't be extended in a portable manner. I know I am
>rambling but I have been waiting for someone to start up a new project
>that might actually accomplish something usable sooner then berlin can. A
>new protocol that is aimed at today's graphics market, but keeps the
>future open is what is needed. Not another implementation of something
>that should be left to die. X was great, buts its out lived its
>usefullness. What do you think?

X can be a power system. The problem is not with X but with XFree86. It
just sucks on every level. I feel that it is time the open source
community take over X and set it's course for us.

Re: Next step

[James S. <jsi...@li...>]

>There already is a small lean X server in XFree86, missing only
>acceleration and Linux input layer support, the one that was initially
>written for the Ipaq (by Keith Packard afaik). It is abut 500k and
>supports AA and most other extensions. It is in cvs now.

Their is also Metro X which has the same thing. In fact that metro X
server is used by the US military. See the metro X web site. The major
problem is XFree86 uses a catherdal developement system. Which makes
developement so slow. When do you think you will see his work become
avaliable to everyone. Sure apps will be using gtk, qt and OpenGL but the
problem is those inetrfaces use X underneath. GTk, Qt and OpenGL in time
will develope so much faster that it will hinder their developement. 

>The reason that Berlin, ggi, kgi etc have failed is that they supported
>none of these. DirectFB seems more hopeful, as they have started off with
>gtk support, with working acceleration already.   

Since I'm working with X they will be supported rigth away.

>Rasterman is rewriting enlightenment using GL isn't he? Yes. I seen a
talk given by him the other day. In fact we had a long discussion about
the X window design and XFree86 :-)