Re: Discussing issues

On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:11:38 -0400, Havoc Pennington <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 12:46:57PM -0400, David Wexelblat wrote:
>> If Keith had just resigned from the Core Team, gone off and done some 
>> stuff,
>> told some people about it, etc, the free market would have taken care of
>> itself. I believe this is the point David, Alan, Mark, a couple of 
>> others,
>> have tried to make.
>>
>> This whole governance thing is a smokescreen, IMHO.
>
> So I'd personally like to move past who did what and who is the jerk,
> and simply ask how we are going to ship an X server in the next year
> or so and then regularly after that, which both contains new
> innovations/APIs/features and has good drivers and
> stability/release-process. What is our X implementation going forward,
> and how do we make it good. How do we coordinate all the interests
> here in a way that creates critical mass and a powerful development
> engine.
>
> The reason Keith matters in all this is that there is this long list
> of code next to his name. In practice, if he's gone then so is this
> long list of important contributions.
>
> Now I'm sure someone is going to follow up and say well that's Keith's
> fault, but here is the thing: I don't care whose fault it is, I just
> don't want to be screwed by having to choose between the drivers and
> the features.
>
> Can't someone in the room be the bigger man so to speak, stand up and
> fix the problem.
>
> And then as a side note, why don't we address the X.org relationship
> while we're at it, and just get X cleaned up and fixed as a whole.

And you Havoc have this power to speak for X.org.  To make things happen
there?  I mean, you guys can talk all day and make divisions all you want,
but unless someone on the other side can bring it home, this whole 
discussion
is meaningless.

Georgina