Xorg 1.5 missed the train?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Tue, 2008-05-20 at 20:22 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> This is the trade off we have chosen. We give up long term API and ABI
> stability to achieve cleaner, better, more maintainable code. We can
> do this because we can fix application code ourselves if their own
> developers refuse to. Microsoft does not have that option. And of
> course this means we constantly get accused by various asshats who
> simply Don't Get It that we're "actively breaking things" and
> "sabotaging everyone" and "refusing to cooperate". It is closed
> vendors like Nvidia who are refusing to cooperate in our open process.
> Seriously, go back to Windows. You do not belong here. Yes I'm talking
> to you, Les. GTFO

You were doing really well up to the last couple of lines.  Please,
let's try to keep things civil.  I know it's frustrating when community
members have to explain open source fundamentals repeatedly.  This might
make good fodder for a FAQ entry, to which you could simply point.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080521/2f7aafe7/attachment.sig>