Xorg 1.5 missed the train?

[Les Mikesell]

Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Callum Lerwick [21/05/2008 11:03] :
>> I like how in these threads it keeps conveniently being ignored that we work
>> just fine out of the box on Nvidia. We just don't have 3D yet.
> 
> I've always being surprised at the amount of blame-shifting that occurs
> in regards to Nvidia's drivers.
> 
> - The free drivers suck. This apparently isn't NVidia's fault (which is
>   strange since they help maintain it) but the x.org developers'.

Yet everyone here keeps saying something better would happen if only the 
proprietary driver were free.

> - The non-free drivers aren't free. This apparently isn't NVidia's fault.

There are such things as non disclosure agreements that can prevent 
publishing information. Why shouldn't you respect their legal obligations?

> - This makes the drivers impossible to ship as part of the distribution
>   or support as a third-party repo. This is somehow the distribution's
>   fault.

The binaries permit redistribution.  How does that make it impossible to 
have in a repository?

> - They don't release drivers once the ABI is frozen or even the day
>   stable releases of x.org are issued. This apparently isn't their fault.

This seems to be speculation, seeing as how we don't have a release and 
the xorg drivers were done before they told anyone else the interface 
was stable.

> - They won't release the specs. This apparently isn't their fault.

It may be legal commitments - but its their right either way and not 
really anyone else's business.

> - They badmouth the open source developement model. I have no idea why
>   but this isn't their fault.

Open source is probably a tiny part of their business.  The stuff seems 
OK on a Mac and I haven't seen this kind of complaint about Solaris 
which uses essentially the same driver.  But perhaps they do a better 
job of coordinating their releases so all the needed components are 
ready before users have to deal with it.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com