Originally posted by TheBlackCat
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Why Wayland & Weston Were Forked
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by soreau View PostDarxus and Daniel's mud-slinging works throughout this ordeal are frivolous, unwarranted, unnecessary, childish, completely ridiculous and an outright waste of everyone's time.
Comment
-
Originally posted by soreau View PostSee the very first post in this thread. Thanks.
You were willing to go to great lengths to explain your reason here, so you obviously thought spending the time to explain it was worthwhile, but you did it here instead of on the mailing list where you were specifically asked (and not by Darxus or Daniel, either, you were asked by Casey, Pekka, Thaigo, and Tiago).Last edited by TheBlackCat; 29 March 2013, 04:01 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by soreau View PostOne comment that I hope this post answers is one by Darxus, an influential personality that has been a consistent problem against me. Taken from the GH-Next phoronix article comments:
Discussion of Wayland along with the Weston reference compositor and other Wayland-related projects.
?Also, lets not forget that soreau was not banned due to his lack of social grace alone. The final straw was his refusal to use an existing mechanism to retain protocol compatibility when making his needed protocol changes, insisting on doing it in a way that would break things, without providing a reason?
First of all, for the record, Darxus is not a core wayland developer. If you would like to be the judge, please refer to his wayland/weston commits. Second of all, this is a completely false statement. It also has a very tyrannical tone to it. The implication is that I am not compliant with certain fabricated 'rules'.
As people have repeatedly attempted to explain to you: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archive...ch/008172.html
Retaining protocol compatibility, when there is an easy, already provided way to do it, is not a "fabricated 'rule'". It is the generally accepted way of writing software.
--- Day changed Tue Mar 26 2013
12:07PM <@krh> the fork is fine, the drama around it wasnt
"I am not going to point fingers here because I do not think this is the fault of any one particular individual."
Originally posted by soreau View PostDarxus and Daniel's mud-slinging works throughout this ordeal are frivolous, unwarranted, unnecessary, childish, completely ridiculous and an outright waste of everyone's time ? with specific intent to damage my public image.
"I would also like to see people come together and work things out despite misunderstandings and interest conflicts."
--- Day changed Tue Mar 12 2013
12:28 < soreau> I DONT GIVE A SHIT what you ignorant people think about attitude, politics and a bunch of crap that doesn't even matter
...
12:32 < Darxus> soreau: FYI, not giving a shit about people is exactly your problem.
12:32 < soreau> Darxus: You're a fucking idiot
One of these was intended for a public audience, the other was sincere.
Comment
-
That was an interesting read, yes. I thought to myself, "hey, maybe this time people will stick to the technical side of the discussion, given that this post is all about that." A few seconds later, "nah, who am I kidding, this is Phoronix, this will degenerate into trolling sooner than one could blink..." Then I read the first comment, and soreau himself is giving people more troll bait. Oh come on...
But speaking about the technical side, I see both sides now, and both have a point. Wayland developers are trying to settle down at this point, so that something bad doesn't happen, now that it's past 1.0. All changes need a lot of thinking and testing now. And Northfield developers, on the other hand, want to work on the compositor to take advantage of all the power that Wayland allows, compared to X. Though due to certain things that are not yet finished in Wayland, they can't really proceed further. They can, however, use some makeshift changes that do allow them to move forward, even if in a somewhat unorthodox manner. Or at least that's what I've gathered of the overall situation.
Overall that isn't much of an issue. The biggest question now is whether Northfield will be able to adapt to the changes in Wayland, once the missing functionality gets implemented officially. If yes, then perfect, in the end Northfield will not be needed and we'll just have Norwood, the non-reference Wayland compositor, that can run on stock Wayland without any patches. But if not, there could be further complications.
As for the EGL problem... I suppose that's something that the Mesa developers should answer. In theory, you could fork Mesa into Plateau or something, but I don't think there really is a need or motivation to do so, since it's just one unimplemented feature, and it's pretty far from the display server anyway.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GreatEmerald View PostWayland developers are trying to settle down at this point, so that something bad doesn't happen, now that it's past 1.0. All changes need a lot of thinking and testing now. And Northfield developers, on the other hand, want to work on the compositor to take advantage of all the power that Wayland allows, compared to X.
He explained why he couldn't do it in a plugin alone - which wasn't even relevant.
What he has failed to explain is why he couldn't do as requested and copy the existing protocol code into a new extension and edit it there, to use the existing mechanism to retain protocol compatibility.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GreatEmerald View PostThat was an interesting read, yes. I thought to myself, "hey, maybe this time people will stick to the technical side of the discussion, given that this post is all about that." A few seconds later, "nah, who am I kidding, this is Phoronix, this will degenerate into trolling sooner than one could blink..." Then I read the first comment, and soreau himself is giving people more troll bait. Oh come on...
Originally posted by GreatEmerald View PostBut speaking about the technical side, I see both sides now, and both have a point. Wayland developers are trying to settle down at this point, so that something bad doesn't happen, now that it's past 1.0. All changes need a lot of thinking and testing now. And Northfield developers, on the other hand, want to work on the compositor to take advantage of all the power that Wayland allows, compared to X. Though due to certain things that are not yet finished in Wayland, they can't really proceed further. They can, however, use some makeshift changes that do allow them to move forward, even if in a somewhat unorthodox manner. Or at least that's what I've gathered of the overall situation.
Overall that isn't much of an issue. The biggest question now is whether Northfield will be able to adapt to the changes in Wayland, once the missing functionality gets implemented officially. If yes, then perfect, in the end Northfield will not be needed and we'll just have Norwood, the non-reference Wayland compositor, that can run on stock Wayland without any patches. But if not, there could be further complications.
As for the EGL problem... I suppose that's something that the Mesa developers should answer. In theory, you could fork Mesa into Plateau or something, but I don't think there really is a need or motivation to do so, since it's just one unimplemented feature, and it's pretty far from the display server anyway.
Comment
-
Yet Another Technical Concern
One technical concern I forgot to mention was one that I just noticed when a user notified me about a problem when using the window list (taskbar) found in northfield/norwood. The problem is, that there is supposed to be a protocol versioning system in place so that you can make additions to the protocol and increment the relevant interface version number. In theory, this is supposed to work in a way that clients would only use the highest interface version it supports locally, to avoid problems with potential crashes when related events/requests are processed. It is yet another technical problem involving the protocol interface versioning system. See the very bottom of http://lists.freedesktop.org/archive...ch/008084.html
My questions there have yet to answered. I tried to work out a solution to this problem with them but they seem like they don't want this new stuff to happen in the first place for some reason. I followed protocol but the version control system is broken by design apparently.
- Scott
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darxus View PostNo, that's not it at all. Although that does seem to be what Scott wants you to think. Or maybe he's genuinely that confused. The wayland developers are all entirely happy with what Scott wants to do - fork weston and the necessary wayland protocol code and develop it into a more usable and fancy desktop environment. That's great. That's basically what weston is for. Others have forked it, and the response was good (everybody even responded positively to ubuntu forking it).
Originally posted by Darxus View PostHe explained why he couldn't do it in a plugin alone - which wasn't even relevant.
What he has failed to explain is why he couldn't do as requested and copy the existing protocol code into a new extension and edit it there, to use the existing mechanism to retain protocol compatibility.
By the way, thanks for contributing to the technical discussion without the whole drama, it's very much appreciated!
Comment
Comment