Discussing Mesa's "Stupid Development Model"
Phoronix: Mesa's "Stupid Development Model" Discussed
Red Hat's David Airlie has started a new mailing list discussion that's surrounding the "stupid development model" of Mesa. Their accepted policy of developing in stable branches and then pulling the code into the master code-base periodically (rather than just working directly on master) is causing many frustrations for Dave in being able to back-port fixes to existing stable branches of Mesa...
Both the original thread and new thread links point to the new thread.
I assume these problems are not adressed with libv's new model?
"So in the spirit of being less of a dickhead" Gonna remember that way to start a thread if I ever want an overly critical attitude towards my posts...
Yeah, I''m with Airlie on this one. The mesa model is bass-ackwards. I track git to get the latest changes for my r600 class card and it's odd to see the way they merge the branches.
Mesa development should just reorganize and follow the Linux development model. It's tried and tested - it just works.
I still think Dave's unfortunately true oxymoron is hilarious, development in stable.
I think that sums up the whole problem.
The linux kernel model simply does not apply for graphics hw related stuff. It's great for (relatively) simple devices, but the complexity of graphics hardware, and the fact that all parts are spread between kernel, libdrm, xserver, mesa, and external utilities, mean that there will be no half-decent development model until they split parts out of their current mother-projects.
Originally Posted by damentz
The fact that it isn't split out is the root cause of this and many more issues we are seeing with graphics drivers.
I can't seem to follow either individual. But I know the standard linux development model doesn't go back and correct mistakes.
Let's say the scheduler worked great in 2.6.21 but 2.6.22 was terrible. A few bug fixes come out for 2.6.22 as 220.127.116.11, ..., 18.104.22.168. The scheduler is still bad. But the reports are ignored as being people using old hardware. 2.6.23 is released and they realize there is problem with the scheduler. It get's fixed as 22.214.171.124.
The problem comes in that 126.96.36.199 should also get a fixed scheduler but it doesn't. Everyone is recomended that they should move to 188.8.131.52.
This is stupid development.
Are the network adapters ever ported back to older releases? Only RedHat does this. I'm not sure what they do for graphics drivers. All the I915 changes seen in the last 10 months probably aren't in the collection.
Maybe we just all need to go micro-kernel where you can try to do you very own mix-and-match kernel by combining modules. \o/
Originally Posted by squirrl