Re: Re: XFree86 4.4.0 RC3

At 06:36 PM 2/22/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
> > mark kandianis wrote:
> > > yeah but why keep making a different named org  retaiining all the same
> > > players?
> > > why didn't they just keep the original one?  what's the diff?
> > > even alan admits it's same so why bother?
> >
> > I didn't say it was the same.  The old X.org was an industry consortium,
> > the new X.org Foundation is a non-profit open source group much like the
> > GNOME Foundation.  The difference is membership will no longer be 
> restricted
> > to companies who pay thousands of dollars per year and the honorary 
> membership
> > of the XFree86 Project, but will be open, allowing the community a much 
> greater
> > say in the ongoing development of the X Window System.
> >
>
>   Didn't XC membership pay for X Window System development?
>It appears to me that the people who want the say are mostly
>the same people as before (ie. industry).  They just don't want
>to pay for it now.

wedll according to alan:

No.  The X.org Group chose to reform itself as the X.org Foundation in
order to open up participation to a wider range of community members and
to respond to the much greater presence of open source participation in
the Unix & X worlds since the days of the original X Consortium.

-- 
         -Alan Coopersmith-          [email protected]
         Sun Microsystems, Inc. -- Operating Platforms Group
         Solaris x86 & Interface Technology: X Window System


having no fees means more development not less.  i i wish the us
government would pick up on that idea they seem to think that more
fees is more services, boy are they foolish.

mark.