Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 60

Thread: Luc Verhaegen Comments On Intel/Mir Politics

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by verde View Post
    Fantastic article. Linux community is really sick.
    Linux community!? LOL. It's just two companies pie-throwing over the next display server. Nothing unusual in the corporate world, just in case you didn't know.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Sunshine State
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pajn View Post
    The whole Wayland vs. Mir is just fanboys and hatred.
    People who care about the technology doesn't rely care.
    Labeling others as 'fanboys' doesn't diminish their arguments or make you look more objective.
    There is valid arguments against Conanical's choice to use their own DS, and it doesn't just involve emotional attachments to one tech or the other.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jrch2k8 View Post
    is backwards, is certain that intel won't touch Mir, so canonical will have to maintain their own mesa branch to make Mir support intel drivers, aka the burden of support the hardware is back to canonical which is the one with the genius idea of make Mir in the first place, not intel in the upstream driver that have noting to do with canonical decisions.

    so like is working today ubuntu will provide a mesa packages will all the neccesary patches to support open drivers in Mir and regular mesa will have wayland support by default thats is all this decision means
    Good thing I'll be sticking with NVIDIA.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    i dont get this why bash Intel for removing a Junk Patch that was developed for Political Gain thats why the shitty Mir server was developed Troll Blog

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Luc Verhaegen Comments On Intel/Mir Politics

    Luc Verhaegen, the former RadeonHD graphics driver developer at SUSE and now working on the Lima project for reverse-engineering ARM Mali graphics, has shared his thoughts on the recent developments surrounding Intel backing out their XMir driver support...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ1ODE
    It is a bit laughable to accuse Intel of politics, when the entire Mir inception amounts to a 100% pure political move since Mir adds /nothing/ technologically, yet he fails (or deliberately omits) to see that.

    And then calls on Intel to be mature. Sure, Intel can forgive Canonical, so long as Mark Shuttleworth scraps his Mir plans and moves over the developer efforts toward bringing Wayland and XWayland to the desktop, and switches back to his original commitment. Should Intel take on Canonical's responsibility of maintaining their patches because Mir users might potentially expose bugs that can be patched up upstream? To me that is a barely tenable argument... because Wayland users - of which there will be thousandfold more (if not even more), will have exposed every bug in every nook and cranny of the Wayland source code and the Intel GPU drivers.

    All due respect to Luc - but he is posturing and adding nothing new to this discussion. Canonical made their bed, now they need to lie in it.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartinN View Post
    because Wayland users - of which there will be thousandfold more (if not even more), will have exposed every bug in every nook and cranny of the Wayland source code and the Intel GPU drivers.
    lol

    Maybe they can get the X bugs ironed out first.

    Even on Windows the Intel drivers and GPUs are a bit of a joke.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Maybe they can get the X bugs ironed out first.
    for some reason people think wayland is an independant product that got out few X developers asses for simple fun or masochism, what you fail to see is that every project in the graphic stack was rewritten to make wayland possible[and mir] aka KMS/DRM/DRI2,3/Gallium/mesa/drivers architecture/TTM/libpciaccess/xkb/pixman/and many other related projects because wayland was literally impossible to make with the previous graphic stack.

    more simply put every line of code made in the last 5 years to the graphic stack in kernel and userspace was with the goal of creating wayland, wayland is the final piece needed to complete the graphic stack upgrade[aka the usable user side API for toolkits] even more simply wayland didn't take 5 years of ultra carefully slow protocol design, rewrite the entire graphic stack to make wayland possible took 5 years.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Sunshine State
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Maybe they can get the X bugs ironed out first.
    To be fair (and i'm no X11 expert) X11 doesn't really have so many "bugs" as it has "architectural flaws".

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,475

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F i L View Post
    To be fair (and i'm no X11 expert) X11 doesn't really have so many "bugs" as it has "architectural flaws".
    I was more referring to Intel's X drivers.

    The idea that in due time (and soon) every bug will be ironed out of Wayland and Intel's driver is kind of silly.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F i L View Post
    To be fair (and i'm no X11 expert) X11 doesn't really have so many "bugs" as it has "architectural flaws".
    flaws that showed up after a darn long time... and after way too many square pegs were fit into round holes. Not sure if it's fair to even call it flawed... more like obsolete?

    If you'd ask me if it was flawed in 1996, I'd probably say 'heck no'

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •