| |||||||||||||
Intel and XMirIntel and XMirPosted Sep 19, 2013 5:04 UTC (Thu) by jamesh (guest, #1159)In reply to: Intel and XMir by Cyberax Parent article: Intel and XMir
Your arguments against Mir sound like they could have equally been leveled against systemd when it was started: that its changes could have been integrated into Upstart (that most major distros were either using at the time or evaluating).
Instead, they continued work as a new project and ended up with a product that you apparently like a lot.
Is it really that difficult to give Mir the same courtesy, and accept that its reasons for existence might not just be political?
(Log in to post comments)
Intel and XMir Posted Sep 19, 2013 5:13 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
No. Systemd from the very beginning had features that would have required complete re-architecting of upstart. And it had been considered at that time, btw.
Intel and XMir Posted Sep 19, 2013 5:36 UTC (Thu) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
" Is it really that difficult to give Mir the same courtesy, and accept that its reasons for existence might not just be political?"
That comparison weakens your plea
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/why.html explains why systemd was started and has the technical details of how the architecture is different and really the inverse of upstart and they still talked to upstart developers before developing an alternative.
If there are similar technical reasons for Mir or if Mir developers talked to Wayland and tried collaborating, feel free to provide pointers.
|
|||||||||||||