The Future of XFree86

[This article was contributed by Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier]

Sometimes a good argument is necessary to get everything out in the open and to make a little progress. That seems to be the case with the current XFree86 controversy.

If you haven't been following it, the furor started when XFree86 developer Keith Packard was ousted from the Core Team. Apparently, Packard was trying to start a fork of the project without discussing the issue with other Core Team members first. After the dust had settled, somewhat, the XFree86 Project's board issued an open invitation to discuss "Any topics...from those related to administrative and management issues through to technical issues." In just eight days, more than 700 messages have been sent to the list. A lot of ideas have been thrown around, including a joint statement from the GNOME and KDE projects.

Packard has now made public some of his complaints with the current status of the XFree86 Project. His "A Call For Open Governance Of X Development" posits that there are a number of problems with development of XFree86. Specifically, Packard writes that XFree86 suffers from limited development resources, slow release schedules, a lack of cooperation with other projects and a lack of information on how to get involved with XFree86 development. Packard concludes that XFree86 needs to be a community-governed project.

The XFree86 Project has already responded to Packard's complaint that there is a lack of information on becoming a developer by adding a prominent link to the front page titled "How to become an XFree86 Developer." Short and to the point, it nevertheless provides some guidance for interested developers: "Get and build the latest XFree86 code from the CVS repository, subscribe to the XFree86 developer list (devel@XFree86.org) and participate."

David Wexelblat, one of the Core Team members, notes that the issue of infrequent releases, at least in terms of card support, is a non-issue:

David Dawes, head of the XFree86 Board of Directors and leader of the core team has committed to tagging regular snapshots, every two weeks, of the CVS trunk. This doesn't address the question of more frequent stable releases, but it should provide a way for more people to be involved in testing XFree86 and providing feedback.

Wexelblat also disagrees that XFree86 should be community-governed. "There is no reason to change the meritocracy, other than to work on promoting sufficient people through it, of sufficient skill/quality/integridy [sic] to get the work done." Rich Murphey, another member of the XFree86 board, agrees that "sweat equity" is the best way to have influence on the direction of the project. "Join devel, write code, join core. That's how it works...I don't see a more effective solution than that."

Both Packard and Wexelblat agree that XFree86 could benefit from additional resources. Wexelblat raises the issue of poor support for XFree86 by commercial companies:

Given the importance of XFree86 to the long-term success of Linux on the desktop, now might be a good time for some of the Linux companies to step up support for XFree86. It seems clear that, regardless of other changes, XFree86 development will remain a meritocracy. However, the attention now being focused on the project is likely to produce some long-term benefits despite the initial unpleasantness.