Will The X.Org 7.5 Release Schedule Be Met?
Phoronix: Will The X.Org 7.5 Release Schedule Be Met?
While the X Server is a very critical component to the Linux desktop and free software ecosystem, the X.Org project has had problems with delivering releases on time. Almost any X Server / X.Org release from recent times can be looked at and generally there were multiple delays in getting that release out that often spanned multiple months...
Can you explain what "Beyond just being late, the quality of these X.Org releases have been degrading." means? As accurately as possible please.
i sincerely hope so, because if opensuse 11.2 ships without X.org 7.5 and x-server 1.7 then i will be deeply disappointed.
god speed to the X devs.
We're all aware of the "problems" (read: symptoms) here. But just nagging won't make them go away.
What we really need now is talk about the underlying causes, and how we might go about addressing them.
Does anyone have any insights here? Are there simply not enough developers on the project? A lack of leadership? Administrative or legal hold-ups? Broken contribution model? Something else entirely?
I doubt they will meet the Jul 31 openSUSE 11.2 component freeze.
Originally Posted by R3MF
with opensuse's 9-10 month release cycle they would be daft to lumber themselves with a 2008 X.org release for a distribution whose life-cycle mainly covers the year 2010. especially for the sake of a few weeks.
I still feel a bit puzzled when I read about X.org vX.X release plans. Xserver release do make sense.
But I thought I understood that the whole point about X modularization was that there would be no need to have coordinate releases anymore.
I really don't care that X.org 7.5 is late or not. Shouldn't everyone only care about individual components?
I don't like these articles, and wish Michael/Phoronix would stop the bashing.
If you don't like the X.org schedule, write an article titled "Number of X.org core developers still small" or something.
I don't think bashing the current dev's is gonna help get anything done faster, and is just going to make those currently volunteering their time feel less appreciated for their efforts.
So, on that note, let me say - Considering the resources, I think the current X.org devs are doing a fine job adding features and moving things forward, and I for one appreciate their efforts, and will be happy to use those features When It's Done.
The reason they went back to a 9-10 month release is because they wanted a longer period of testing, tweaking, and refining of the base system. I am glad they went back to this model that was successful for them in the past. They jammed the last release in 6 months that did not allow them sufficient time for bug fixes resulting in many normally classified Major bugs to be downgraded or put off to a future release.
Originally Posted by R3MF
Originally Posted by slashgrin
First, there's a lack of developers.
Second, there's a lack of testers; most people testing are developers.
There is no lack of leadership; things are more or less agreed upon through discussion, and the only real problems are making sure that fglrx and nvidia don't get broken too badly while still trying to fix the God-forsaken code that history has left us with.
Saying "legal" is FUD, so please don't say it. There are no legal issues that have not already been dealt with or worked around.
The contribution model of "patches welcome" is only broken in that patches are very rare. We haven't figured out any way to make patches happen faster; perhaps we need a publicity campaign. "X.org: Your patches are even more welcome than they were before."