Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Canonical Working On Mesa Code Again For Mir

  1. #11

    Default

    I saw what it said. It was a little unclear at first, because of course we have this in the article: "The set of patches are needed for supporting Mir's EGL platform in mainline Mesa." We have about as much reason to trust Canonical as we do Microsoft. Over the years, they have proven themselves to be only takers. They are ready to take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take take from the community, but pathes from them are about as rare as rain in the Sahara.

    *IF* this is true that the patches are beneficial to all, instead of just Canonical, then sure. But that's up to the Mesa developers to decide.

    Maybe tonight its going to rain................... But I'm not holding my breath. You know the old saying:

    "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me"

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
    *IF* this is true that the patches are beneficial to all, instead of just Canonical, then sure. But that's up to the Mesa developers to decide.
    This is contradicting to your earlier statement:
    The Mesa crew should reject the patches.
    What this statement and your post are saying is: Canonical has a bad track record, so we should outright deny their patches, based on nothing but their history, regardless if the patches are beneficial to Mesa or not. We don't even think about giving them a chance to contribute.
    But called out for that you suddenly revoke that statement. Another hypocrite going up to my ignore list. Have a nice life.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    507

    Default

    halfmanhalfamazing; these are patches for egl, and are beneficial to the whole ecosystem. Did you even read? Or does halfman refer to having half a brain. If you spent even 10% of the time you spent typing to reading we wouldn't have to explain this to you for the 2 time.

Posting Permissions

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