the endless development cycle for DRM...
This post is not to be taken as a flame or anything (or remotely) similar, but...
Taking a quick look at the mesa/drm gitlog, it seems there haven't been any tarball releases since the last year, and quite irregular, as both the 2.2.0 and the 2.3.0 versions were released 'more or less' in the same time frame
Googling for a concrete release date doesn't even help, as there's many changes a day, curiously observed allmost all of them related to the nouveau driver, but that's ok for me, as there's tons of updates for the general DRM and the part I'm really interested in, the Intel driver...
Anyway... is this development cycle leading to a new release or will we have to make a clone of the git tree forever? Last time I did it, the internal version said '2.3.1' (looking at the .pc file) and it had some flaws like invalid memory allocations or faulty allocations at all...
Would be nice if they come to release a new version by the end of the year, at least... because it's not nice for users to be presented with the only choice between using the now 1-year aged DRM or biting the bullet with a git clone...
I couldn't say, but maybe they are putting all their efforts into Gallium3D?? From what I can make out of that document they are aiming at pretty much revamping the current DRI/DRM 3D drivers scheme and to sever bond of the drivers to Mesa, maybe that's what have them so busy to not update Mesa in such a long time? Maybe that's it, however, I do remember reading some news about Mesa having anew release not too long ago, but I may be wrong, maybe they were only speaking about the OpenGL API part, and not the DRM bits. I'm not aware of any driver that currently uses Gallium3D, though I know there are some that do use it (but I don't know which)
Maybe this is a dumb question, but doesn't most of DRM get "released" by showing up in the Linux etc kernel ? My understanding was that Dave was pushing changes from git across on a pretty regular basis :
In addition to the Gallium work there seems to be a push on cleaing up memory management.
Last edited by bridgman; 11-18-2007 at 01:11 AM.
Which is equally better, as that is a core aspect of DRM drivers.
Originally Posted by bridgman