Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mir Still Causing Concerns By Ubuntu Derivatives

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic Mir Still Causing Concerns By Ubuntu Derivatives

    Mir Still Causing Concerns By Ubuntu Derivatives

    Phoronix: Mir Still Causing Concerns By Ubuntu Derivatives

    With Canonical's planned adoption of their in-house Mir Display Server over the next year rather than using an X.Org Server or Wayland, derivatives such as KDE-based Kubuntu continue to fear the change and what exactly the options will be...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM4OTU

  • Scimmia
    replied
    Originally posted by k1l_ View Post
    first: it was no illegal statement like calling someone a rapist. second: it was more than a "oops, sorry"
    first: claiming inherent security issues is just as damaging. second: no, it really wasn't more than that. They did nothing to attempt to repair the damage they did with their false information.

    This isn't mudslinging, this is trying to help you see why people are so pissed and why Canonical won't be forgiven any time soon. This isn't kindergarten, an apology doesn't solve everything.

    Leave a comment:


  • k1l_
    replied
    Originally posted by Scimmia View Post
    Let me ask you both this: If I put up a webpage claiming that you were rapists and sent it to your friends, family, employer, etc, then took it down the next day and said to you, "oops, sorry", would that be enough?
    first: it was no illegal statement like calling someone a rapist. second: it was more than a "oops, sorry"

    But i dont think you actually read that because you were busy shitstorming :/


    So instead of carrying on and help to solve problems in and with the linux community people keep the mudslinging going powered by the KDE guys :/

    Leave a comment:


  • Scimmia
    replied
    Originally posted by k1l_ View Post
    that correction of a mistake and apologizing for that is not enough, shows whats really wrong in the linux "community". that should be thought about!
    Originally posted by intellivision View Post
    And an apology is an apology. Some people can be stubborn and not accept it, but that doesn't negate the fact that it exists.
    Let me ask you both this: If I put up a webpage claiming that you were rapists and sent it to your friends, family, employer, etc, then took it down the next day and said to you, "oops, sorry", would that be enough?

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by intellivision View Post
    I should point out that the Mir devs have retracted the statement about the API being unstable so we have to assume that is no longer the case.
    That's interesting. Where did you see that?

    That said, it would be up to the Canonical team to supply those patches in the first place, but there should be no reason for the KWin team to reject those contributions outright simply because they're distro specific.
    I somewhat agree, but:

    If Canonical is supplying the patches, and Canonical is the only ones using the patches, what does it even need to go upstream for? The only real reason would be to get upstream to maintain it over time, so Canonical doesn't have to do so anymore. That is asking them to take on more work just to help out Canonical, and it doesn't seem like they are in the mood to do so right now.

    Edit: sorry, i guess Rahul already made the same point above.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 06-17-2013, 06:07 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • valeriodean
    replied
    Originally posted by intellivision View Post
    I should point out that the Mir devs have retracted the statement about the API being unstable so we have to assume that is no longer the case.
    No, we have NOT to assume that.
    If you retract one time, you can retract another time and so on. And in case of Ubuntu, they seem able to retract an impressive frequency.
    Ubuntu: "We will utilize wayland"
    Ubuntu: "We need to retract: we will utilize Mir because wayland repeats X's mistake"
    Ubuntu: "We need to retract again: we will utilize Mir, but wayland does not suffers the same X problems"
    Ubuntu: "Mir is protocol agnostic (?) and tailored around unity, so API can be changed every times it needs."
    Ubuntu: "We need to retract: API no more begin unstable... bla bla bla"

    Who can be so stupid to trust in ubuntu's declaration one more time?

    Leave a comment:


  • RahulSundaram
    replied
    Originally posted by intellivision View Post
    That said, it would be up to the Canonical team to supply those patches in the first place, but there should be no reason for the KWin team to reject those contributions outright simply because they're distro specific.
    Upstream will and does often reject distro specific patches across many free software projects because maintenance and testing is a shared burden not just for the specific distro but also for the upstream developers who are more often than not, volunteers. Otherwise there is no reason, those patches couldn't just stay in the distro repository in the first place.

    Leave a comment:


  • alexThunder
    replied
    Originally posted by erendorn View Post
    Nvidia evaluating adding Wayland support, and that was already a year ago (at that time, NVidia was obviously still not evaluating adding Mir support ).

    But it's not a surprise, it has always been the case, and it's just what you'd expect from them: they are looking a what it will cost them to support something, and what they will gain, and when. Then they make decisions based on that. But until there is actual support, they'll never confirm anything. If you ask them about mir support, you'll get the same answer.
    Well, that definitely has more substance than pure speculation. I take back what I said about NVidia and Wayland. Still, I think it's more about supporting both, Mir and Wayland through EGL.

    Leave a comment:


  • intellivision
    replied
    Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
    *If* that ever happens (and I think it unlikely, myself), then I'd expect the KDE developers to at least consider accepting the patches. But even then, I'd expect them to be judging on technical merits, and from what we know about Mir being an unstable target in terms of API (as the Mir devs acknowledge), they may still be reluctant to accept them without some guarantee of stability from the Mir upstream...
    I should point out that the Mir devs have retracted the statement about the API being unstable so we have to assume that is no longer the case.
    Furthermore, in relation to the KWin team, as I said before they have the right to rip out any code that introduces bugs and vulnerabilities as seen when they dumped their tiling window function much to the dismay of the community.
    That said, it would be up to the Canonical team to supply those patches in the first place, but there should be no reason for the KWin team to reject those contributions outright simply because they're distro specific.

    And an apology is an apology. Some people can be stubborn and not accept it, but that doesn't negate the fact that it exists.

    Leave a comment:


  • mrugiero
    replied
    Originally posted by entropy View Post
    BTW, is there any write-up which deals with the complexity of an EGL driver for Wayland/Mir compared to an X driver?

    AFAIK, some stuff is delegated to the driver, like multi-monitor handling.
    OTHO, it sounds like a driver for Wayland/Mir is far easier to support for AMD/NVidia as you have not to deal
    with all the 2d-cruft present/required for X (which causes many problems and burns lots of man hours, I guess).

    Is this correct?
    Before I write anything else, I must make you notice you should take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt, because my knowledge in the area is too shallow.
    But, as I see it, what you said is correct by the wrong causes. It doesn't need to deal with X specifics, which are an extra to the support they need to add just for running on Windows (which is their main target in general because of market share), but supporting 2D has nothing to do with the X specifics. I don't know if OpenGL and EGL deals with it, but some cards (I'm not sure if modern cards still ship it) have a 2D engine and it could be managed by a driver even with no X. The problem would be, in the case OpenGL and its derivatives doesn't deal with it, you need another generic interface.
    About the complexity, I guess it's the same as an OpenGL driver, since AFAIK is a specification derived from it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X