Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by janne on Thursday 26/Feb/2004, @07:24

"Watching the presentation, I had the big impression that Keith was planning on adding these extensions to the XFree86 code base."

He's no longer involved in Xfree-developement (he was kicked out), so I don't see how he could add to Xfree codebase.

Related Links

·   Articles on Community and Events
·   Also by janne
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by José on Thursday 26/Feb/2004, @07:32

Maybe this means add to XFree 1.0 licensed codebase?

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by Anonymous on Thursday 26/Feb/2004, @11:28

Forking XFree 4.3rc2 is easy.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by janne on Friday 27/Feb/2004, @00:10

Why should he fork Xfree, when he already has Xserver, that does many thing Xfree does not do? Xfree is a monstrocity that could use a replacement.

True, Xserver is not as mature as Xfree is, but that is to be expected. It is a relatively young project. But that does not mean that it should be scrapped!

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by Anonymous on Friday 27/Feb/2004, @00:41

XFree86 is established and has more hardware drivers.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by janne on Friday 27/Feb/2004, @05:09

Windows is more established and it has more hardware-drivers, maybe we should all concentrate on improving Windows instead of concentrating on Linux?

Just because something is "established" is not a good enough reason to think about replacement. Xfree may be "established", and it shows! it's developement is stagnating. Without any competition, they have no reason to really improve.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Why Xfree and not Xserver?
by chris on Friday 20/Aug/2004, @11:28

we cant concentrate on improving Windows

windows certainly has no competition, it's developement is stagnating.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"There are some gaps in my recollection of the past, I always assumed that was sleep." -- Rob Kaper
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.