[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       xfree86-forum
Subject:    Re: [forum] XFree86 modularization
From:       David Dawes <dawes () XFree86 ! Org>
Date:       2003-05-09 19:19:51
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 01:59:36PM -0500, Billy Biggs wrote:
>David Dawes (dawes@XFree86.Org):
>
>> Some of us feel that having a simple, complete and integrated build
>> process is important.  Addressing the well-known build-time
>> configuration inadequacies would be a better solution in my opinion,
>> and would have broader benefit than just this specific class of issue.
>> 
>> Maybe in the end it's just the philosophical difference between those
>> who prefer, say, the FreeBSD approach vs the typical Linux approach.
>> I can go to freebsd.org, check out the FreeBSD CVS, and build a
>> complete and well-integrated system from a single command line.
>
>  I don't think this is the only philosophical difference.  In my
>opinion, it is clearly more convenient for both users and developers of
>a project to have it include the source trees of their dependencies.
>Lots of reasons have been mentioned.
>
>  That said, linking to externally maintained libraries means you're
>    a) respecting that you are a member in a larger development
>       community, and
>    b) making an implicit commitment to that project that you will
>       contribute back fixes.
>
>  Neither of these are obligations under the licensing, but I think to
>do otherwise is somewhat insulting to the maintainers (packaging and
>maintaining a library and ensuring compatibility and widespread
>usefulness is hard work), and also somewhat anti-social to the larger
>development community, regardless of any technical argument either way.

What a load of claptrap.

So what is your conclusion?

David
-- 
David Dawes
Founder/committer/developer                     The XFree86 Project
www.XFree86.org/~dawes

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]