From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 28 22:43:10 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685601065672; Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:43:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vehemens@verizon.net) Received: from vms173005pub.verizon.net (vms173005pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48C6D8FC0C; Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:43:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sam ([74.100.237.5]) by vms173005.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KTU00EABCFXOBMO@vms173005.mailsrvcs.net>; Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:43:09 -0600 (CST) From: vehemens To: Robert Noland Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 15:44:31 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <200911281326.35064.vehemens@verizon.net> <1259445565.2315.53.camel@balrog.2hip.net> In-reply-to: <1259445565.2315.53.camel@balrog.2hip.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline Message-id: <200911281544.31444.vehemens@verizon.net> Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: xorg ports roadmap? X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 22:43:10 -0000 On Saturday 28 November 2009 13:59:25 Robert Noland wrote: > On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 13:26 -0800, vehemens wrote: > > On Saturday 28 November 2009 10:02:04 Robert Noland wrote: > > > On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 16:01 -0800, vehemens wrote: > > > > On Friday 27 November 2009 12:53:35 Peter Jeremy wrote: > > > > > On 2009-Nov-26 14:55:40 -0800, vehemens wrote: > > > > > >If your having so many problems with these updates, why not just > > > > > > split ports into current and stable branches? > > > > > > > > > > This isn't as easy as it sounds because there are interactions > > > > > between so many different pieces. Back when X.org/XFree86 was a > > > > > small number of ports (basically server, libraries and base > > > > > clients), it wouldn't have been too hard. X.org now comprises > > > > > something like 250 pieces with not-very-well documented > > > > > interactions. > > > > > > > > > > It might help if X.org could be cleanly split into client ports and > > > > > server ports but even that's not possible because they both depend > > > > > on a number of X-related libraries. > > > > > > > > The suggestion was to have the entire ports tree as both a current > > > > and stable branch, then using the same (similar?) rules as used for > > > > the source branches. > > > > > > > > A ports freeze would mean that changes to the stable branch would be > > > > limited, but work could still go on in the current branch. > > > > > > > > The MFC process could be semi-automated. > > > > > > This is hard enough to manage in src for one -CURRENT and 2/3 stable > > > branches... Ports would be insanity and would in no way help to address > > > the current issues or reduce the amount of work needed to get things > > > done. > > > > You stated in a several earlier emails that you are having problems such > > as: a lengthy TODO list, complaints with ports breakage, coordination of > > multiple efforts to name a few. > > > > If you have a better suggestion, then please make it as we would all like > > to hear it. > > Attempting to maintain 2 branches, close to doubles the amount of work > needed to get things done. Not only for me, but also for portmgr@ if it > existed in any sort of official capacity. Having a repo setup which > would more readily allow others to work on major updates could help, > though I don't get a lot of offers in this regard other than people > willing to test. The current difficulty with updating is due to Intel > and nouveau dropping support for kernel configurations without GEM/TTM. > GEM/TTM are non-trivial to port into the kernel, although I do have WIP > on both, there is no ETA. Could you publish the WIP?