[forum] Suggestion for XFree86
20 Mar 2003 14:02:16 -0800
On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 13:10, David Dawes wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 12:31:58PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> >On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 11:59, David Dawes wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 01:34:25PM -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
> >> >> depends on XFree86's continued success. David Dawes has turned to that
> >> >> constituency to assist him in resolving this situation. Both of these
> >> >
> >> >After kicking Keith out. Bad mistake but whats done is done.
> >> >
> >> >> The ONLY thing XFree86 needs to do to correct this problem is to establish a
> >> >> mechanism where any interested person may join XFree86 and be given an equal
> >> >> vote to elect a slate of candidates for a governing board of directors whose
> >> >
> >> >This isnt about voting, governance and dictatorship IMHO, its about
> >> >change. XFree86 is hard to get involved with usefully, resistant to cool
> >> >ideas and strongly wedded to an occasional not rolling regular release
> >> >model.
> >> Keith already put a lot of cool stuff in, and had a very free hand in
> >> doing so. That he did this isn't tied to him being a core team member.
> >> Others do cool stuff to. XFree86 rejects very little of what is submitted.
> >What exactly is Keith's status as a committer? I had the impression
> >from talking to others that he was no longer able to commit to XFree86.
> Yes, that is correct, and that has been true since he abused his
> commit privilege by committing XFIXES on the eve of the 4.3 freeze
> without any prior discussion about it. It didn't prevent him from
> continuing to contribute to the 4.3 release after that point, as
> can be seen from the CHANGELOG.
How was that decision made? Committing changes before a freeze sounds
fine to me. If it lacked review, it should have just been backed out
(preferably by the original committer).
Eric Anholt email@example.com