4 ms·

I think you're mistaking what is probably largely a political issue for a technical one. The sense I get here is that there is nothing technically wrong with t

by efuquen 13y ago

I think you're mistaking what is probably largely a political issue for a technical one. The sense I get here is that there is nothing technically wrong with the patch, it's not like Intel went back to Ubuntu and said you have to fix X Y & Z to get this merged. They initially accepted the patch and only after having accepted it on technical grounds they've come back and rejected it because Mir isn't the horse they're backing. If anything I would guess Intel is the one getting bent out of shape here, though I couldn't possibly know for sure due to lack of details.

bitwize 13y ago
Intel is acting in the best interests of the community, which almost unilaterally backs Wayland. Linux is not about choice[0]. It's 2013, and the hard lesson that choice is death to a reliable platform should have been well-learned by now, if by nothing else than by the sheer fact that Apple steamrolled the Unix workstation market into oblivion. Mac OS -- which provides comparatively little choice -- grows YoY, whereas non-Mac desktop Unix, including Linux, has faded into statistical noise. If non-Android Linux is going to claw its way back into relevance, then the community needs to decide on one framework for graphics, one for sound, etc. and back them wholeheartedly. It is a technical issue because focusing all developer effort on one good thing produces better technical results than splintering it among a dozen mediocre things. Apostasy needs to be punished, and that's what Intel has done. [0] http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-January/m...
- synchronise 13y ago
  Apostasy needs to be punished, that's 21st century thinking right there.
  - gph 13y ago
    If Linux is ever to become mainsteam the way OSX and Windows are then 'apostasy' needs not be accommodated. Now you can debate whether the philosophy of the Linux and open-source community is for creating a standardized product that can be easily adopted and used by the mainstream user-base. But for companies like Intel, I understand why they want to push it in that direction.
    - synchronise 13y ago
      Linux already is mainstream, just look at the success that Android has had. And there are still competing frameworks out there that are objectively better than the decided on counterparts. ALSA replaced OSS, then OSS4 came out. The latter is more stable and can do more things than the former can do alone, such as per application volume controls, yet it's only used in the BSD sphere. Likewise, OpenRC is a great replacement for SysVinit without changing the overall structure of the init system, unlike systemd which attempts to consolidate all of those parts into 'optional' modules that other projects are making compulsory e.g. Gnome Shell has a hard dependency on systemd as logind cannot be used alone any more, not to mention the large changes to the init design.
    - nitrogen 13y ago
      Linux doesn't need to become mainstream the way OS X and Windows are. Linux is mainstream the way Linux is, and will continue to be with Android, Steambox, and a huge chunk of the smart TVs, Blu-ray players, set-top boxes, and other embedded device markets.

by efuquen 13y ago

bitwize 13y ago

Intel is acting in the best interests of the community, which almost unilaterally backs Wayland. Linux is not about choice[0]. It's 2013, and the hard lesson that choice is death to a reliable platform should have been well-learned by now, if by nothing else than by the sheer fact that Apple steamrolled the Unix workstation market into oblivion. Mac OS -- which provides comparatively little choice -- grows YoY, whereas non-Mac desktop Unix, including Linux, has faded into statistical noise. If non-Android Linux is going to claw its way back into relevance, then the community needs to decide on one framework for graphics, one for sound, etc. and back them wholeheartedly. It is a technical issue because focusing all developer effort on one good thing produces better technical results than splintering it among a dozen mediocre things. Apostasy needs to be punished, and that's what Intel has done. [0] http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-January/m...

synchronise 13y ago
Apostasy needs to be punished, that's 21st century thinking right there.
- gph 13y ago
  If Linux is ever to become mainsteam the way OSX and Windows are then 'apostasy' needs not be accommodated. Now you can debate whether the philosophy of the Linux and open-source community is for creating a standardized product that can be easily adopted and used by the mainstream user-base. But for companies like Intel, I understand why they want to push it in that direction.
  - synchronise 13y ago
    Linux already is mainstream, just look at the success that Android has had. And there are still competing frameworks out there that are objectively better than the decided on counterparts. ALSA replaced OSS, then OSS4 came out. The latter is more stable and can do more things than the former can do alone, such as per application volume controls, yet it's only used in the BSD sphere. Likewise, OpenRC is a great replacement for SysVinit without changing the overall structure of the init system, unlike systemd which attempts to consolidate all of those parts into 'optional' modules that other projects are making compulsory e.g. Gnome Shell has a hard dependency on systemd as logind cannot be used alone any more, not to mention the large changes to the init design.
  - nitrogen 13y ago
    Linux doesn't need to become mainstream the way OS X and Windows are. Linux is mainstream the way Linux is, and will continue to be with Android, Steambox, and a huge chunk of the smart TVs, Blu-ray players, set-top boxes, and other embedded device markets.