Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mir Support Not Merged For Mesa 9.2

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

  • mrugiero
    replied
    Originally posted by przemoli View Post
    1) Ubuntu is single BIGGEST Linux distro. Lets talk about REAL Linux users affected. Shall we? (Or maybe for some unfanthomable reason will we start to exclude Linux users?)
    Nobody has really reliable data to prove that or the opposite, so let's not make such claims.
    As for the matter of Mir, Canonical should care about their users first, some of the ones who use Ubuntu-flavor are close to mine, and switched with my help to it, and I wouldn't like them suffering because of their stupid idea of running the desktop on XMir. They use it for academic purposes and for their works, they can't be bothered by that joke. I wouldn't be affected in 13.10, since I use Xubuntu, and I'm only testing on another box to avoid making unfunded claims and to ease that burden from my friends.
    2) You suggest that no Mesa folk use Ubuntu as development environment? ITS NOT CANONICAL WHO ONLY USE UBUNTU. Its large distro. Perfectly capable to host development of kernel/mesa/xorg (for now). After Mir will be only thing maintained by Canonical, than devs will need to compile & install kernel/mesa/xorg/wayland on their own. But that IS WHAT THEY DO NOW. Since developing always involve working on bleeding edge.
    No, he suggest that no mesa folk should use it just to test Canonical's things work. If they use it or not, should be because they like it or not. If you think any of mesa devs use Ubuntu, the charge of the proof is on you, I guess.
    3) Are you suggesting that Canonical will push CRITICALLY IMPORTANT code for THEIR MIR EFFORT, and then will not care about bugs in that code? That they will then go and will stop maintining that code upstream, and will only provide downstream fixes? Right, because Canonicall devs all dream about wasting their time and effort on work that will be unneeded by anyone.
    No, he's suggesting that Canonical will push critically important code for their Mir effort, and then expect upstream to maintain the code upstream, effectively releasing the burden from them, because that's one of the main reasons you'd have to expect code used only in your distro to go upstream. I don't think it would go that way, but they still have to make a compromise about that.
    4) That only show problem within MESA development community. Is Mesa ONLY for specific distros? NO. (Go look at your 1) ) So why they refuse to work with people who have certain requirements for Mesa, and work with others who have very similar requirements? Technical reasons? (Beyound Your FUD)
    If mesa has a politic on avoiding distro specific patches, it's enough to reject Mir patches at least until another distro states they will use Mir.
    Technical reasons: see maintenance of code.
    Also, your argument about being ONLY for specific distros? What? It's quite the opposite. In the other hand, they refusing to work on anything is their damn right. Accepting a patch is a whole different story, you really need a technical reason to not leverage the work of others on your code base, I agree, but to do the work themselves, they need a motivation, either Canonical paying or either them wanting because of reasons. Pretending they should 'because Canonical' is quite the attitude Canonical should start to avoid. They are working with people who has similar requirements because one is a distro specific, DE specific solution and the other is a common protocol everyone can use, and several distros already made plans to switch to that. Canonical did, even, and they didn't reject them when they were on the same boat.

    [QUOTE=przemoli;342138]
    2) Here is funny thing. Mesa delivers OpenGL (and other API's) to the LINUX. NOT LINUX BUT MIR. NOT LINUX WHEN XORG OR WAYLAND*. So here goes 1). Should Mesa dev team cut out large portion of Linux users, because they are not interested in supporting them?[QUOTE]
    Actually, you are wrong. Mesa delivers OpenGL to X, and will do the same to Wayland. It uses kernel interfaces, yes, but is not Linux specific. As long as you have current DRI, you can use mesa, and FreeBSD does use it for some cards. And again, if people will argue that Canonical can do whatever best fit them, great for them. Mesa can do the same, and it's arguable that Mir fits them at all. Otherwise, Canonical supporters are having an ugly case of double standard.
    The only one cutting out a large portion of Linux users anyway is Canonical, when they decided to go their own. If they are not able to support Mir by themselves, then they should have put more thought to it, because it was a predictable possibility.
    3) Its responsibility of code "submitter" to care about submitted code. Why Wayland folks want their code in upstream Mesa? To forget about it the minute they submit it? Come one. Idea of upstream coop is to work TOGETHER. Frome where come this idea that it MUST be "abandon as soon as its upstreamed". And again. Do you sugest that Canonical WONT care about CRITICALLY IMPORTANT bugs for their MIR stack? (As in: "Wow, Mir wont work on new Mesa.. But that's ok. We do not care. Lets Mesa folks sort it out.... 3 months letter. Wow Mesa folks still didn't fixed it. .... 3y letter. Wow those bugs still there? ..." That is strange notion you have here. Mesa integration is MUST have for Mir. So canonical have all the reasons to care about that code).
    Maybe you are right. But there will be no work together on something only them use, face it. Why would Red Hat people work on the Mir code base? They wouldn't. All of the other major distros sees Wayland as the next step, so they are likely to work together on it. See it this way. Since there are nobody else likely to work on the code for Mir, what will happen? Canonical will be the only one fixing its bugs. As they are on a schedule, they will probably merge their fixes downstream before it goes through the revisions on upstream. The only difference that makes for Canonical is a smaller patch to apply when they clone upstream in the next distro. As for mesa, they lose time on revisions that makes no difference to any user, and that have negligible benefit for Canonical. What's the point on being upstream, then?
    4) Quantify "large code base". And quantify work needed to be done by Mesa contributors who will not work for Canonical nor for MIR. AFTER you have those two data points, lets talk about maintainance burden. (Yes. If burden is hight and Canonical shoulder it on their own upstream its OK. So You NEED to make the distinction of work that could be done by Canonical, and on which could not be..)
    Canonical should weight those factors, I don't know how much manpower they have. But see above to see why is pointless to want upstream.
    And Mesa already was modified for Wayland. Same will happen for Mir. Exactly paraler situations. Same reqirements for each code authrs from the stand point of Mesa core team. Only trash talking about Canonical, and assumption of best possible perf. on behalf of Wayland authors.

    * At least Intel is working on Mesa + Android.
    No, not exactly parallel situations, as explained. For Wayland, there are actually motivations to work together for different groups, so easing the maintenance burden on $COMPANY is not the only benefit, but actually there is a sharing of code. For Mir, Canonical is the only interested group so far.
    And I wonder where you get from that mesa devs are talking trash about Canonical or assuming best possible performance from Wayland. I don't know of anyone asserting that Mir will have bad performance even in Phoronix, let alone mesa developers. Which will have almost surely a bad performance is a desktop under XMir, but obviously all of us who claim that are aware that the same would happen if someone tried to do the same with XWayland. The point is, nobody has been so stubbornly stupid to actually want this kind of solution aside from Canonical with XMir. Most concerns on Mir itself has nothing to do with performance.

    Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post
    Yep, Wayland is big. I wonder when the *BSD's will start looking into the Wayland protocol and start updating their kernel and graphics stacks to prepare for their Wayland implementations.
    AFAIK, they are already on that task. They need to finish their DRI2 drivers (I believe Intel's was the only one complete). Is there any other requirement aside of DRI2 and KMS they don't meet?

    Leave a comment:


  • LinuxGamer
    replied
    Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post
    Yep, Wayland is big. I wonder when the *BSD's will start looking into the Wayland protocol and start updating their kernel and graphics stacks to prepare for their Wayland implementations.
    we need to make a list of Project's Supporting Wayland as we know LightDM is the only one supporting Mir?
    start a new Thread? Titled Project's Supporting Wayland?

    Leave a comment:


  • r_a_trip
    replied
    Originally posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    Hmm IBM and Raspberry Pi are working on Wayland too you can use Weston on the Raspberry Pi now http://wayland.freedesktop.org/raspberrypi.html
    Yep, Wayland is big. I wonder when the *BSD's will start looking into the Wayland protocol and start updating their kernel and graphics stacks to prepare for their Wayland implementations.

    Leave a comment:


  • LinuxGamer
    replied
    Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post
    przemoli, you keep hammering on the number of Ubuntu users, but you seem to overlook one teensy little thing and that is the number of Ubuntu users don't matter one iota to the developer communities and the corporations who call the shots around Wayland and Mesa here. Heck, those deadweight desktop users don't even make Canonical profitable. What makes you think that this group of non-contributing and non-paying people has any clout on the global Linux market?

    Wayland was annointed as THE X.org successor. Even Canonical announced broad support for it while it was still a mere technology demo. Canonical never contributed to it though. A year before Wayland's magnus opus was supposed to be included in most distro's, Canonical swoops in and announces they have been toying with a homegrown pixelflinger for about 9 months and they now expect everybody to drop everything else and bend all and sundry out of shape to support Canonical's redundant, in-house, toy project.

    Do you really think Red Hat, Intel, X.org, Mesa, Samsung, Collabora, Jolla et al are going to give serious consideration to Mir (especially with the cumbersome GPLv3 licensing)? Canonical doesn't shoulder any significant development outside their own pet projects and most of their "contributions" are one way streets directly into Ubuntu. Wayland is already lined up to go places where it will bring in money, like in-vehicle infotainment, like mobile operating systems (e.g. Sailfish and Tizen). It will power the next generation of workstations and as a freebie bonus, it will modernise the desktop experience of everybody else who don't really have any impact on the world.

    What does Mir do (except muddy the waters)? It goes where Ubuntu touch goes, which for now still seems to be second hand, repurposed Android phones. On the desktop it is nothing more than a shim underneath X.org.


    --- As an aside, those developer communities and corporations are already supporting all those users (now stuck on Ubuntu) free of cost with Wayland and X.org. There are several excellent distrubutions who package these invaluable contributions for all to use.
    Hmm IBM and Raspberry Pi are working on Wayland too you can use Weston on the Raspberry Pi now http://wayland.freedesktop.org/raspberrypi.html

    we forget Gnome KDE E18 Maybe xfce and most all Linux DE's are going to Use Wayland All Linux's some Ubuntu Developers are Working on Wayland i Say we Port Unity to Wayland too the List of Project's for Wayland support is Huge Atm
    Last edited by LinuxGamer; 07-12-2013, 09:48 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • r_a_trip
    replied
    The number of Ubuntu users are irrelevant

    przemoli, you keep hammering on the number of Ubuntu users, but you seem to overlook one teensy little thing and that is the number of Ubuntu users don't matter one iota to the developer communities and the corporations who call the shots around Wayland and Mesa here. Heck, those deadweight desktop users don't even make Canonical profitable. What makes you think that this group of non-contributing and non-paying people has any clout on the global Linux market?

    Wayland was annointed as THE X.org successor. Even Canonical announced broad support for it while it was still a mere technology demo. Canonical never contributed to it though. A year before Wayland's magnus opus was supposed to be included in most distro's, Canonical swoops in and announces they have been toying with a homegrown pixelflinger for about 9 months and they now expect everybody to drop everything else and bend all and sundry out of shape to support Canonical's redundant, in-house, toy project.

    Do you really think Red Hat, Intel, X.org, Mesa, Samsung, Collabora, Jolla et al are going to give serious consideration to Mir (especially with the cumbersome GPLv3 licensing)? Canonical doesn't shoulder any significant development outside their own pet projects and most of their "contributions" are one way streets directly into Ubuntu. Wayland is already lined up to go places where it will bring in money, like in-vehicle infotainment, like mobile operating systems (e.g. Sailfish and Tizen). It will power the next generation of workstations and as a freebie bonus, it will modernise the desktop experience of everybody else who don't really have any impact on the world.

    What does Mir do (except muddy the waters)? It goes where Ubuntu touch goes, which for now still seems to be second hand, repurposed Android phones. On the desktop it is nothing more than a shim underneath X.org.


    --- As an aside, those developer communities and corporations are already supporting all those users (now stuck on Ubuntu) free of cost with Wayland and X.org. There are several excellent distrubutions who package these invaluable contributions for all to use.

    Leave a comment:


  • V10lator
    replied
    Damn edit limit, forgot something:
    Originally posted by przemoli View Post
    Idea of upstream coop is to work TOGETHER.
    Canonical isn't known to be willing to work together. If they where there would be no Mir in the first place as they would have worked on Wayland (like they promised before Mir).

    //EDIT: And don't forget that Mesa and Wayland devs are in a good relationship. So Canonical spreading FUD about Wayland doesn't help them getting their patches upstream.
    Last edited by V10lator; 07-12-2013, 07:42 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • V10lator
    replied
    Originally posted by przemoli View Post
    1) Servers do not need that much in terms of X.org/Wayland/Mir. So servers do not impose much requirements on those. Phones are dominated by Android with its own stack. X.org wont be there. Wayland could go there. Mir come from there. But as for now, neither have any significant presence there. So we end up with desktop users. Here Ubuntu is the king.
    Servers need Mesa for OpenCL. Phones aren't dominated as the market is still changing (from dump phones to smart phones) so a lot can happen. There are phones with X.org
    The X Window System software has become the standard graphical interface across Linux & Unix workstations and servers, and has been included in a growing number of mobile phones and tablets in recent years.
    Source: http://www.x.org/wiki/Other/Press/XorgOIN/

    Wayland is designed to run on phones, too. In fact is is designed to run everywhere. [EDIT]And there are already companies waiting for Wayland for their mobile OSes[/EDIT].
    2) Here is funny thing. Mesa delivers OpenGL (and other API's) to the LINUX. NOT LINUX BUT MIR. NOT LINUX WHEN XORG OR WAYLAND*.
    Can't understand what you want to say, no matter how much you cry.
    So here goes 1). Should Mesa dev team cut out large portion of Linux users, because they are not interested in supporting them?
    They cut out nothing. Canonical is able to apply their patches downstream and maintain them there, too. There's absolutely no reason to have them upstream as long as nobody outside of Canonical plans to use Mir. You self proved this by having not a single valid reason why it can't be downstream.
    3) Its responsibility of code "submitter" to care about submitted code.
    History told us a different story.
    Why Wayland folks want their code in upstream Mesa? To forget about it the minute they submit it?
    You don't know how often that happened, just see ReiserFS, for example (that's one of the reasons the kernel devs didn't wanted to have Reiser4).

    [EDIT]Not Wayland wanted their code upstream, all distributors (at that time even Canonical) wanted.[/EDIT]
    Come one. Idea of upstream coop is to work TOGETHER.
    And why should the Mesa devs help Canonical? Do they get any benefit from that?
    As in: "Wow, Mir wont work on new Mesa.. But that's ok. We do not care.
    More like: Wow, Mir wont work on new Mesa.. But Mesa isn't our software, so give the bug report to the Mesa devs. Until it's fixed we will just use the old Mesa version and nobody will notice.
    That is strange notion you have here. Mesa integration is MUST have for Mir
    No problem, they can do it downstream.
    4) Quantify "large code base". And quantify work needed to be done by Mesa contributors who will not work for Canonical nor for MIR. AFTER you have those two data points, lets talk about maintainance burden. (Yes. If burden is hight and Canonical shoulder it on their own upstream its OK. So You NEED to make the distinction of work that could be done by Canonical, and on which could not be..)
    To get these points the patches have to be upstream first. So why even risk it? Again: It doesn't benefit Mesa nor Canonical.
    And Mesa already was modified for Wayland.
    Sure, Wayland is not distro-specific.
    Same will happen for Mir.
    Nope, Mir is distro-specific. Stop arguing that away.
    Last edited by V10lator; 07-12-2013, 07:34 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rvdboom
    replied
    You seem to consider that Mir is going to be a de-factor standard that everybody in the open source world needs to support because Canonical is backing it.
    That's just not how it works. Anything which is considered distro-specific is not going to be supported upstream, whether in the kernel, in the low levels libraries or even in the desktop environments. Whether you like it or not, that's how it goes.
    Because distros go away sometimes, however successful they were at some point.
    Because developpers do not all run the same distro and they don't want to have to work with distro-specific code, since they can't even check if their last changes broke them or not.
    Because developers come and go. Because some change their distro once in a while.

    Mir **IS** currently distro specific. Period. That may change in the future and upstream policies may change accordingly but right now, that's how it is.
    Wayland patches were accepted in Mesa **because** they are not distro-specific, because most people in the Linux eco-systems, at least in the developpers, believe it will be the standard display server in a few years. And even if Canonical, Red Hat or SuSE disappear, it will remain the standard. Just as X have been (and still is right now).

    Why it seems so difficult to understand is beyond me...

    Leave a comment:


  • przemoli
    replied
    Originally posted by TAXI View Post
    1) Anything to back that up? I see Canonical making red numbers only while Red Hat gets the money. What are REAL Linux users? Desktop users only? Why are server administrators, mobile phone users and so on not real? But after all the size of the distribution doesn't make it more than one, so the single distro argument stays valid. As rvdboom already told: Why does Canonical have to have it upstream when they are the only distribution using it and when they want to maintain it?

    2) Yes, I don't think mesa devs will use Mir. They target Xorg/Wayland, so they need to find bugs ASAP. What would be better for that task than using Xorg/Wayland all the time they are on a computer?

    3) Exactly. Why else do they want that code upstream?

    4) No, it's not for specific distros only, it's for the whole Linux ecosystem. Mir is NOT for the ecosystem but for Canonical only. See the difference? Technical reasons? Larger code base, so more work needed to maintain it. Also it may introduce new bugs.

    //EDIT: Maybe see it that way:
    All cars use rubber for their wires. All car manufacturers agree that this is the best solution. Now you (as a car manufacturer, too) step up and make steel wires, then go out and tell the streets have to be made of rubber, it won't impact other wires but you need it for yours.

    1) Servers do not need that much in terms of X.org/Wayland/Mir. So servers do not impose much requirements on those. Phones are dominated by Android with its own stack. X.org wont be there. Wayland could go there. Mir come from there. But as for now, neither have any significant presence there. So we end up with desktop users. Here Ubuntu is the king.

    2) Here is funny thing. Mesa delivers OpenGL (and other API's) to the LINUX. NOT LINUX BUT MIR. NOT LINUX WHEN XORG OR WAYLAND*. So here goes 1). Should Mesa dev team cut out large portion of Linux users, because they are not interested in supporting them?

    3) Its responsibility of code "submitter" to care about submitted code. Why Wayland folks want their code in upstream Mesa? To forget about it the minute they submit it? Come one. Idea of upstream coop is to work TOGETHER. Frome where come this idea that it MUST be "abandon as soon as its upstreamed". And again. Do you sugest that Canonical WONT care about CRITICALLY IMPORTANT bugs for their MIR stack? (As in: "Wow, Mir wont work on new Mesa.. But that's ok. We do not care. Lets Mesa folks sort it out.... 3 months letter. Wow Mesa folks still didn't fixed it. .... 3y letter. Wow those bugs still there? ..." That is strange notion you have here. Mesa integration is MUST have for Mir. So canonical have all the reasons to care about that code).

    4) Quantify "large code base". And quantify work needed to be done by Mesa contributors who will not work for Canonical nor for MIR. AFTER you have those two data points, lets talk about maintainance burden. (Yes. If burden is hight and Canonical shoulder it on their own upstream its OK. So You NEED to make the distinction of work that could be done by Canonical, and on which could not be..)

    And Mesa already was modified for Wayland. Same will happen for Mir. Exactly paraler situations. Same reqirements for each code authrs from the stand point of Mesa core team. Only trash talking about Canonical, and assumption of best possible perf. on behalf of Wayland authors.

    * At least Intel is working on Mesa + Android.

    Leave a comment:


  • V10lator
    replied
    Originally posted by przemoli View Post
    Here goes typical FUD:
    """
    well to be honest i doubt this patches will be accepted and is probable canonical got the idea already and won't bother anymore in trying

    1.) Mir is a single distro solution that im not sure mesa dev be eager to upstream
    2.) Nobody except canonical uses Mir, so the review process will be hard since mesa devs won't install Mir to test the patches
    3.) Who is going to maintain it? if that is not well defined no one will step to it fix it if it gets broken
    4.) Canonical send a patches already to mesa mailing list and those went straight to /dev/null
    """

    1) Ubuntu is single BIGGEST Linux distro. Lets talk about REAL Linux users affected. Shall we? (Or maybe for some unfanthomable reason will we start to exclude Linux users?)

    2) You suggest that no Mesa folk use Ubuntu as development environment? ITS NOT CANONICAL WHO ONLY USE UBUNTU. Its large distro. Perfectly capable to host development of kernel/mesa/xorg (for now). After Mir will be only thing maintained by Canonical, than devs will need to compile & install kernel/mesa/xorg/wayland on their own. But that IS WHAT THEY DO NOW. Since developing always involve working on bleeding edge.

    3) Are you suggesting that Canonical will push CRITICALLY IMPORTANT code for THEIR MIR EFFORT, and then will not care about bugs in that code? That they will then go and will stop maintining that code upstream, and will only provide downstream fixes? Right, because Canonicall devs all dream about wasting their time and effort on work that will be unneeded by anyone.

    4) That only show problem within MESA development community. Is Mesa ONLY for specific distros? NO. (Go look at your 1) ) So why they refuse to work with people who have certain requirements for Mesa, and work with others who have very similar requirements? Technical reasons? (Beyound Your FUD)
    1) Anything to back that up? I see Canonical making red numbers only while Red Hat gets the money. What are REAL Linux users? Desktop users only? Why are server administrators, mobile phone users and so on not real? But after all the size of the distribution doesn't make it more than one, so the single distro argument stays valid. As rvdboom already told: Why does Canonical have to have it upstream when they are the only distribution using it and when they want to maintain it?

    2) Yes, I don't think mesa devs will use Mir. They target Xorg/Wayland, so they need to find bugs ASAP. What would be better for that task than using Xorg/Wayland all the time they are on a computer?

    3) Exactly. Why else do they want that code upstream?

    4) No, it's not for specific distros only, it's for the whole Linux ecosystem. Mir is NOT for the ecosystem but for Canonical only. See the difference? Technical reasons? Larger code base, so more work needed to maintain it. Also it may introduce new bugs.

    //EDIT: Maybe see it that way:
    All cars use rubber for their wires. All car manufacturers agree that this is the best solution. Now you (as a car manufacturer, too) step up and make steel wires, then go out and tell the streets have to be made of rubber, it won't impact other wires but you need it for yours.
    Last edited by V10lator; 07-12-2013, 05:29 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X