[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Xouvert-general] Recent Popular questions turned into FAQ

From: Per Cederberg
Subject: RE: [Xouvert-general] Recent Popular questions turned into FAQ
Date: 19 Aug 2003 10:00:23 +0200

You could also include some stuff from the Xwin.org Wiki:




On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 08:16, David Ross wrote:
> Perhaps we need a FAQ?  I would be happy to maintain it.  If my
> questions/answers/definitions are incomplete/wrong/etc feel free to
> change.
> We could start off with:
> 1.)   Q)      Will Xouvert remove/modularize network transparency?  I
> think we should do this to make X faster, more robust, or just plain
> better.
>       A) We *cannot* remove network transparency. Period. There is
> absolutely no 
> question about it whatsoever. X11 *is* a _network_ protocol. I think the
> reason everyone thinks its slow, is because everyone thinks that X11 on
> a local machine goes thru TCP/IP. It doesn't. It uses UNIX sockets 
> which are very fast.
> 2.)   Q)      Why does Xouvert use the XFree License?  I think the
> GPL/BSD/<my favourite license> is way better.
>       A)      We are using the XFree License so that we maintain
> license compatibility with Xfree86(tm) and so that we can contribute our
> developments/code/improvements back to the XFree86 project.  We do not
> want to fork the Xouvert and XFree86 projects.
> 3.)   Q)      I keep hearing this talk of forking and branching,
> what's the diff?
>       A)      If we were to fork Xouvert from XFree86, then we would
> be creating a whole other X Window system.  We don't want to do that.
> That would be bad because XFree86 is a proven accepted standard on many
> platforms.  It is it already stable, but lacks some features that
> I/we/you/he/she/someone wants.  That is why we are branching it--to pick
> up the pace, and have a more public development process those developers
> who want to work on X and for those who need to be on the bleeding edge.
> A branch simply means that we want to have our work integrated back into
> the larger whole and that we want to maintain compatibility with
> XFree86.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf
> Of Jonathan Walther
> Sent: 2003 August 18 9:59 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Xouvert-general] License question
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 06:35:58AM +0200, Massimo Santoro wrote:
> >The question was: "why not make it GPL instead of X11/MIT?"
> >
> >The answer was: "because we could not recontribute to XFree86"
> >
> >Then: "GPL would not cause anything <bad> about this, let's not forget 
> >it is
> >an independent fork, maybe GPL would make it better".
> That is false.  Xouvert is an independant developement branch.  It is
> not a fork.  Everything we do, is intended to be incorporated in the
> "stable" XFree86 project eventually.
> As a branch, and not a fork, it is important to keep the licenses
> compatible and consistent, and not to alienate our co-developers at the
> XFree86 project.
> Jonathan

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]