Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A GEM-ified TTM Manager For Radeon

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    What's wrong with getting paid for writing software?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by FunkyRider View Post
      What's wrong with getting paid for writing software?
      Nothing at all, in the direct sense.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by bridgman View Post
        Keith's crime was coming up with a new memory management API which the other devs thought was good enough to justify re-implementing parts of their existing code.

        I'm sure there was a bit of "oh crap, if Intel is going this way then we'd better go that way too so we can all stay compatible" feeling but honestly the X devs are a pretty strong-willed lot and I don't think any of them would go along with GEM unless they felt that GEM had something good to offer.

        TTM was very important because it provided enough of a common API for the community to implement (there are prototype Intel, Radeon and Nouveau implementations, possibly more) and to build on (DRI2), but after all the implementation work I think there was some general feeling that "this isn't quite right". GEM seems to have come along at the right time and so it received fairly broad support from the developers, even the ones who had just finished working on TTM.

        Assuming Keith cares about any of this discussion, he might want to work on his "naming skills". If he had called GEM "TTM Reloaded" everyone would be calling him a hero. Same with UXA -- if he called it "EXA re-implemented over a real memory manager, with a different name so I don't over-write the existing EXA files" everyone would be dancing in the streets.
        I like the way you think, I will subscribe to your magazine... if you have one

        and to whom dislike what keith did: "He develops X since 20 years ago, are you sure he doesn't know what he is doing? "

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
          devs have practically abandoned the "Free" part of open source
          I'd like to point out that the "free" in "free software" has always been "free as in speech", hence "libre software".

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Vighy View Post
            I like the way you think, I will subscribe to your magazine... if you have one

            and to whom dislike what keith did: "He develops X since 20 years ago, are you sure he doesn't know what he is doing? "
            Hehe right, it pissed me off when I read that M. Packard would have surrender to Intel and transform X in an Intel only platform.
            If he would have feel any pressure, I am sure his skills and knowledge are worth enough to find another job, in a more xorg friendly company.
            I am not saying that Intel is more xorg friendly than any other company in the business, but just stop bitching about people who spent their entire life in developing Xorg.

            Comment

            Working...
            X