Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:46 -0600 From: "Scott T. Hildreth" <shild@sbcglobal.net> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, x11@FreeBSD.org, cokane@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: xorg7.3 [was: 7.0 preview slides] Message-ID: <1194187906.92719.65.camel@fbsd1.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20071104044132.GA10723@soaustin.net> References: <4727BE96.9020804@FreeBSD.org> <20071102173425.GB5282@graf.pompo.net> <472BB699.6070507@FreeBSD.org> <20071103005145.GA50846@FreeBSD.org> <472BDF06.5050700@FreeBSD.org> <1194122492.92719.56.camel@fbsd1.dyndns.org> <20071104044132.GA10723@soaustin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 23:41 -0500, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 03:41:32PM -0500, Scott T. Hildreth wrote: > > I understand Xorg is changing their code to be modular, but was it > > necessary to update the ports to 7.3 so quickly? It may be my > > perception, but it seemed like 7.2 was put in the ports tree and > > shortly after that 7.3 was committed and then many problems started. > > The situation was that our import of 7.2 was delayed as we tested and > retested and retested, to get the framework working for the modular > code and ensure as few regressions as possible. Because of this, 7.3 > was almost ready for release by the time we were done. > > It seems as though 7.3 is better for some people and worse for others. > With such a large codebase, this is probably inevitable. > > In any case, as soon as 7.3 was out, I'm sure xorg lost interest in > bug reports about 7.2, and people were already asking us when the > next version was going to be in. > Ahh, that makes sense. Thanks for the reply Mark. > mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1194187906.92719.65.camel>