[Unhappy Programmers Need Pats On Back]
GGI Project Unhappy On Linux!
It scared the cheese whiz out of me as well. Somebody buy these guys a beer
to win them back.
No Please Don't Leave!
Hi. I've been watching the political action around the GGI project for about
5 months. I've also tried the software. I'm not part of the development
team, I have no connection with them, but I am concerned that we are about
to see the first major rift in the Linux OS. Of late, some very strong
language and commentary has been circulating around the linux-kernel list,
and the GGI project lists. In Linux kernel, a lot of the GGI programmers are
not, in my opinion, getting a fair crack at demonstrating their worth to the
rest of the Linux community. These are good guys who put loads of time in to
build a graphics subsystem that will have to compete with the likes of
DirectX. IMHO, their software is getting bashed before its even run by
others.
Risks
GGI has worked hard with the Linux OS to bring a graphics subsystem into
being. SVGAlib, X servers that run suid, and risky hardware detection are
not good for the Linux OS. We need these features to compete with other
OS's, and to converge with them. Moreover, GGI is needed if Linux is to
truly run on multiple architectures. It is the only solution in development
that allows one graphical non-X Linux program to run on an Amiga, and then
an x86 machine. X is nice, but its slow for GAMES. I want to be able to take
advantage of fast "no X required" apps so I can whup my friend's asses.
SVGAlib sucks. It was great while it lasted, but its card support and model
does not move well across platform.
Okay... forget the religion. I've probably committed countless technical
errors already.
What to do?
Firstly, GGI faces a unique chicken-and-egg problem. Without people trying
the thing out (even if it blows up) then there is little understanding. So
try it out, if you can. And complement these guys on the work so that they
feel like devoting as much time to linux as they already have. Secondly,
Please read their documentation and code and try to get an understanding of
it. Without people to make their case on linux-kernel, usenet etc, then
there is a lot of misinformation and flamery going on which is just an
insult. I have seen the blanket statement "GGI will just bloat things" many
many times, but I have also seen "Linus hates us." I don't think he hates
anybody. I also know that GGI coders are as concerned about bloat as anybody
not coding NT stuff. There needs to be serious Dialogue and somebody has to
give Linus (Alan etc) a demo in person, give him a phone call, or something
else.
If there is a legitimate technical reason why GGI should not go in the
kernel, then it should be proven thoroughly. And we should debate openly,
with discrete reference, and objectively, with the understanding that at the
end of the day we are all working for the good of humanity.
To Learn more go to the GGI Project Homepage, and take a look at the recent
postings in their mailing list archives to get an idea how unhappy these
guys are. Also, to take a look at the alternative (IS it??) to GGI, look at
what is going around in the m68k world, the /dev/fb framebuffer. As soon as
I find an URL I will post it. There are dox in the kernel source.
Users are counting on developers to make the right choice
GGI could bring 3d graphics libraries into every linux distribution as
standard, and move many critical things into userspace daemons and libs.
Without GGI, the promise of games doesn't look good. Without GGI, graphical
console programs will remain messily bound to the hardware, without GGI, I'm
worried that Linux will lose its competitive edge. But I could be totally
wrong about this! And who would know unless we all started talking about it?
Give these developers a chance to show you their stuff Its too early now to
tell how good GGI will be. Just open up the issue
BSD Getting There First Is Not The Issue
The GGI guys are porting to BSD. But IMHO, Linux would bring the technology
more to the front. The BSD developers have shows more interest than the
Linux developers, and, it seems to me that this is a strange reversal of
behaviour. I remember a time when Linux was considered more "open" to core
development than BSD. It seems that the reverse is true for GGI on Linux. If
GGI is adopted by both BSD and Linux, both win.
Apologies to everybody I have offended. Just getting people to think about
this is good. I have faith that Linus, as arbiter of what goes in the tree
and what doesn't, will make the right choice GIVEN THAT PEOPLE GIVE HIM THE
RIGHT INFORMATION Both sides of the argument need to do this, and approach
the problem of graphics support together.
Think I'm nuts? Good. Now mail me. fool@uvic.ca
-- Best regards, -- Boris.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu