X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
| From: | Leon Shiman <leon-AT-magic.shiman.com> | |
| To: | pr-AT-lwn.net | |
| Subject: | XOrg Foundation Releases X Window System X11R6.7 | |
| Date: | Wed, 7 Apr 2004 01:41:35 -0400 (EDT) |
X.Org Foundation Announces Formation and First Release The new X.Org Foundation will help drive the X Window System to support state-of-the-art desktop technologies San Francisco, CA., April 6, 2004 - X.Org Foundation today announces their first release of the X Window System since the formation of the Foundation in January of this year. The new X.Org release, called X Window System Version 11 Release 6.7 (X11R6.7), builds on the work of the X.Org X11R6.6 and XFree86TM Project Inc. V4.4RC2 releases to combine many of the latest developments from a large number of the participants and companies working with the X Window community. The X Window System X11R6.7 release can be found at http://www.x.org/. "We have made great progress in creating a framework upon which further development of the X Window System can be based," agreed the Interim Board of the Foundation. "We expect to provide the desktop community with at least two more releases of the X Window System before the end of this year to encompass all of the new technologies and ideas that we are developing". "This release marks the return to community development of the X Window System under governance open to all contributors for the first time since the founding of the X Consortium in 1988," said Jim Gettys, co-founder of the X Window System, Interim X.Org Foundation board member and member of the research staff of HP Labs. "We welcome the formation of the X.Org Foundation and are looking forward to support this group to bring the work on the X Window System to a new technological level," said Egbert Eich, X Window System developer at Novell's SUSE LINUX business unit. Matthias Ettrich, Director of Software Development at Trolltech, said "As a multi-platform GUI toolkit vendor, we appreciate the value of a powerful underlying windowing system, and as such, we are excited about the direction X.Org is heading. We are very much looking forward to supporting new technologies around X, and we will do our share to make the advances of the platform accessible to software developers." "Being an underlying technology to the most popular desktops on all GNU Systems, in particular GNOME and KDE, the X Window System is indeed an essential part of most Free Software operating systems," said Georg C.F. Greve, president of the FSF Europe. "It helps many users to access and enjoy the freedom of Free Software. We are glad that X.Org will from now on watch over this enabling technology." "Red Hat is pleased to be working with the new X.Org Foundation to build a vibrant open source community around X Window System innovation. Look for X11R6.7 in the upcoming Fedora Core 2 and future Red Hat Enterprise Linux products," said Havoc Pennington, desktop development manager at Red Hat. "As one of the largest GNU/Linux distribution projects in the world, the Debian Project is delighted to see that freedom and diversity are alive and well in the X technology sector. We're also delighted that the X.Org Foundation is dedicated to retaining the licensing model that has made the X Window System an enduring success," said Branden Robinson of the Debian GNU/Linux Project. "Like us, the X.Org Foundation is a member-driven organization devoted to Free Software. We cannot help but be enthusiastic about them and the work they're doing for the X Window System and Free Software communities alike." "An open source project works best with a large community of active contributors. OSI welcomes the return of X to open source development by the entire community. I'm looking forward to contributing myself," said Russell Nelson, Vice-President of the Open Source Initiative. "Cygwin/X is benefiting heavily from the community-building spirit of the X.Org Foundation and their open development environment. We are pleased to be basing our releases on the good work of the X.Org Foundation", said Harold L Hunt II of the Cygwin/X project. "The XonX Project is very pleased that the X.Org Foundation has been eager to support Darwin and Mac OS X. X11R6.7 adds new features that will be appreciated by many Mac OS X users," said Torrey Lyons, XonX Project Founder. Membership of the X.Org Foundation is free to all participants. Applications for membership are now being accepted, and active participants in the further development of the X Window System are invited to visit: http://www.x.org/XOrg_Foundation_Membership.html to complete a membership application. Participation in the Foundations Sponsor Group is also available to those who wish to financially support the activities The X.Org Foundation. Current Sponsors include Hewlett Packard, IBM, and SUN Microsystems. About The Foundation Release X11R6.7 is the first official X.Org Foundation release. It is the successor release to X11R6.6 from X.Org. To assure consistency with industry and community requirements and practices, it was developed from the X.Org X11R6.6 code base and the XFree86 V4.4RC2 code base, with the addition of bug fixes and enhancements. These enhancements include: new IPv6 functionality, Freetype V2.1.7, fontconfig V2.2.2, Xft V2.1.6, Xcursor V1.1.2, and Xrender V0.8.4, with corresponding changes in documentation and notices. Additional source and binary releases are anticipated during 2004. About The X Window System The X Window System provides the only common networked windowing environment bridging the heterogeneous platforms in today's computing. The X Window System is one of the most successful open-source, collaborative technologies developed to date and is the standard graphical window system for the Linux® and UNIX® operating systems. The inherent independence of the X Window System from the operating system, the network and the hardware, as well as its successful interoperability, have made it widely available and deployed with more than 30 million users worldwide. All major hardware vendors support the X Window System and many third parties provide technologies for integrating X Window System applications into the networked computer or personal computer environments including Microsoft Windows®, UNIX, Linux and Mac OS® X. Further, thousands of software developers provide X Window System applications, and with the continued growth of Linux and the emergence of Mac OS X, the number of users is growing rapidly. About X.Org Foundation X.Org Foundation L.L.C. is a recently formed Delaware company organized to operate as a scientific charity under IRS code 501(c)(3), chartered to develop and execute effective strategies that provide worldwide stewardship of the X Window System technology and standards. The group is currently managed by an Interim Board of Directors that includes: Stuart Anderson (Free Standards Group), Egbert Eich (SUSE), Jim Gettys (HP), Georg Greve (Free Software Foundation Europe), Stuart Kreitman (SUN Microsystems), Kevin Martin (Red Hat), Jim McQuillan (Linux Terminal Server Project), Leon Shiman (Shiman Associates) and Jeremy White (Code Weavers). The website for the X.Org Foundation can be found at http://www.x.org/. Note to editors: UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the US and other countries. LINUX is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds. XFree86 is a trademark of The XFree86 Project, Inc. Microsoft and Windows are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac OS is a registered trademark of Apple Computer, Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. All other company names are trademarks of the registered owners.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 13:17 UTC (Wed)
by heinlein (guest, #1029)
[Link] (9 responses)
Further info about the new 6.7 release can be found in the Release Notes at freedesktop.org.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 15:18 UTC (Wed)
by eru (subscriber, #2753)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 17:03 UTC (Wed)
by rfunk (subscriber, #4054)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 17:41 UTC (Wed)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link]
On the other hand, there's other updates in this new x.org release that (I believe) are not in XF86 4.4 (the freetype, xft, etc. updates for example). I could be wrong about that though, as it's from memory (of compiling the XF86 4.3.99.90[23] releases) several weeks ago.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 18:47 UTC (Wed)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 6:23 UTC (Thu)
by eru (subscriber, #2753)
[Link]
Sorry, I mistyped, the rekevant part of the release notes was:
* The remains of XIE and PEX extensions were removed completely. Similarly, libxml2's remains were removed, as it is not used at all in the distribution.
XIE appears to be (or have been) "X Image Extension", for server-side handling of images.
One reference I found is
Developing Imaging Applications with XIElib. Sound useful, I wonder why it got deprecated?
I guess if every X11 served did not have XIE, any image manipulation program would have to have a replacement code in itself anyway to be portable, and so software authors naturally had little motivation to rely on it in any way. But the same reasoning works against any other X11 extension, and yet some of them get used.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 22:17 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 21:55 UTC (Wed)
by dwheeler (guest, #1216)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 1:41 UTC (Thu)
by bojan (subscriber, #14302)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 10:02 UTC (Fri)
by Duncan (guest, #6647)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 13:39 UTC (Wed)
by pivot (guest, #588)
[Link] (2 responses)
http://www.mail-archive.com/devel%40xfree86.org/msg05907.html
Posted Apr 7, 2004 21:50 UTC (Wed)
by proski (subscriber, #104)
[Link] (1 responses)
x.org changed the license on X11R6.4 to proprietary but had to restore the original license. XFree86 was staying with X11R6.3 in the meantime. Now XFree86 changed the license and x.org is working on the fork. The history repeats itself.
Posted Jan 6, 2021 18:00 UTC (Wed)
by zdavatz (guest, #70954)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 14:19 UTC (Wed)
by s_cargo (guest, #10473)
[Link] (9 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 14:24 UTC (Wed)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link] (7 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 15:17 UTC (Wed)
by scglwn (guest, #1245)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 15:34 UTC (Wed)
by pkturner (subscriber, #2809)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 7:56 UTC (Thu)
by scglwn (guest, #1245)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 21:44 UTC (Wed)
by dwheeler (guest, #1216)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 18:43 UTC (Wed)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link] (2 responses)
What's interesting is that the newer Mozilla releases have capitulated.
Posted Apr 9, 2004 4:21 UTC (Fri)
by leonbrooks (guest, #1494)
[Link] (1 responses)
"straight quotes"
“double curlies”
'apostrophes'
‘single curlies’
Posted Apr 9, 2004 16:32 UTC (Fri)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 14:44 UTC (Wed)
by marduk (subscriber, #3831)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 14:31 UTC (Wed)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link] (4 responses)
Anyway I found this funny: "Also, please do let me know if something is horribly wrong; I haven't done
Posted Apr 7, 2004 16:06 UTC (Wed)
by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
[Link]
Posted Apr 7, 2004 18:20 UTC (Wed)
by raytd (guest, #4823)
[Link] (2 responses)
Good question. Since the "rift" occured, I've perused the ml archives of fdo and xfree on occasion looking for answers to no avail. What really happened (as well as where things are headed now) is not at all obvious to me. <hint>
Posted Apr 7, 2004 19:38 UTC (Wed)
by wcooley (guest, #1233)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 6:20 UTC (Thu)
by raytd (guest, #4823)
[Link]
I may be mistaken, but I have my suspicions that there was a hell of a lot more going on between Keith Packard, David Dawes and the other X developers than so-called governance issues and personality conflicts. I for one want to know what it was. IMHO, disputes like this are indicative of future problems in the process of F/OSS development, and I'd like to know what the problem really was so that similar situations can be avoided (if possible). Oh well, I guess if I might have the answers I seek were I more involved.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 15:23 UTC (Wed)
by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)
[Link]
I hope they don't lose too many developers with this change. Anyway, maybe we'll see some exciting things happen with X in the future. Maybe even an end to the recurring X is [slow|bloated|ancient|decrepit] and needs to be replaced by [wx|Y|GGI|berlin|qtopia] theme.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 17:26 UTC (Wed)
by tjc (guest, #137)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 18:28 UTC (Wed)
by ggoebel (guest, #4487)
[Link]
It's been a year since O'Reilly issued a press release stating that they would make the out-of-print X books available under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Where are they? I can only find a couple Motif, XView, and Openlook books at O'Reilly's Open Book Project It'd be nice if x.org could use the O'Reilly books as the base from which to update their documentation...
Posted Apr 7, 2004 18:39 UTC (Wed)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link] (23 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 19:04 UTC (Wed)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link] (22 responses)
Posted Apr 7, 2004 19:52 UTC (Wed)
by Centove (guest, #1887)
[Link]
Posted Apr 8, 2004 0:42 UTC (Thu)
by iabervon (subscriber, #722)
[Link] (20 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 0:51 UTC (Thu)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 1:43 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 5:50 UTC (Fri)
by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 9:19 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 12:45 UTC (Fri)
by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 12:58 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link]
Posted Apr 8, 2004 12:28 UTC (Thu)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (13 responses)
sorry, that is not true.
Posted Apr 8, 2004 15:26 UTC (Thu)
by tjc (guest, #137)
[Link] (8 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 16:50 UTC (Thu)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (7 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 16:56 UTC (Thu)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link] (6 responses)
Posted Apr 8, 2004 18:43 UTC (Thu)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (5 responses)
http://invisible-island.net/xterm/ (I don't _believe_ the comment to be incorrect, I _know_ it).
Posted Apr 8, 2004 21:06 UTC (Thu)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 0:10 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Apr 9, 2004 0:40 UTC (Fri)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link] (2 responses)
There is occasionally this perception that I see amongst some members of the open source
community that the donation of your time you make to the community somehow *entitles* you to be
a smarmy prick in public.
It doesn't.
The page you pointed to doesn't even mention your name, much less does it contain any links
that even *appear* to point to any information concerning whether X.org is the same as the
Consortium. Certainly, it is neither more nor less blather than my own website, but at least
I'm not pointing people to mine with a snotty off-hand remark.
So it didn't seem to be a fertile ground for any research (which, rather than analysis, seems
to be what you're upbraiding me for not having done). In any event, I gave you three bites
before calling you on your attitude; I'm done now.
Posted Apr 9, 2004 0:57 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link] (1 responses)
>It has been X.org's versions of things like xrdb, xterm, which is completely untrue. Arguing about this proves that On the other hand, you are posting anonymously, and acting
Posted Apr 9, 2004 1:17 UTC (Fri)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link]
Well, no. I wasn't even arguing about the point you're standing on; didn't bring it up at
all, not even once.
And as for anonymous...
well, I'll be dipped. This is about the only place I comment that doesn't hotlink my
name to either an email address or a website; notwithstanding which, anyone who wanted to do
their research could turn up a meat address and phone number for me with (frankly, far too)
little effort.
But, you know, none of this meta-argument speaks at all to your orginal reply, which (clearly)
other people found as useless as I did. I stand on my reputation, and by my comments.
Posted Apr 8, 2004 22:43 UTC (Thu)
by richardfish (guest, #20657)
[Link] (3 responses)
I am guessing that you are "Thomas E Dickey", the maintainer for xterm for XFree86. If so, you are in a better position than any of us to enlighten us on the relationship/history between X.org, the X Consortium, and XFree86. While I don't expect you to post a 300-page history-of-X here, a couple of sentances and URLs would have been helpful. I'll post my best understanding of things. I'm sure somebody will correct me if I am wrong. The X Window System is really a set of specifications that are versioned (X11R6 is X Windows System version 11 revision 6). Any vendors distributing "X Windows" should (must?) comply with those specifications. The X Consortium maintained the specifications, backed by reference source code. In 1996 it transferred that job to The Open Group which formed X.org to take on the task. Now in 2004, that job will be done by the "X.Org Foundation", which is really just a name change so that it can call it's forked version of XFree86 "X.org". Are we confused yet? Bottom line: they are not the same, but they do the same job. References:
Posted Apr 9, 2004 1:41 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link]
I was not much interested in the slice dealing with the derivation of There are other issues that come to mind, but I don't want to start
Posted Apr 9, 2004 1:52 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link]
Posted Apr 9, 2004 1:59 UTC (Fri)
by tedickey (guest, #20738)
[Link]
There was a much-toned-down history of X on this website recently.
Posted Apr 7, 2004 20:11 UTC (Wed)
by stevenj (guest, #421)
[Link]
In the longer term, they are planning to split X up into a series of smaller packages for the server, different libraries, utility applications, etcetera. The distros want such a modular release very badly so that different parts of X can be updated independently. Apparently, many of these components are rapidly reaching maturity—they are not rewrites, after all, just a split of the existing code into pieces with a more modern build architecture (autotools vs. imake).
In the even longer term, Keith Packard's freedesktop.org X server, a substantially rewritten server compared to X11R6.7's, may replace the X server component, but that's apparently still pretty experimental.
X11R6.7 Release Notes
Surprisingly, it seems to throw away a lot of stuff. PEX, CIE, tinyX, ...X11R6.7 Release Notes
Spring cleaning in X11 land?
Maybe the stuff that was dropped didn't have an acceptable license? I License issues
know the new license that everyone hated started appearing in September.
A lot of the stuff that's mentioned as being dropped was also dropped in the XFree86 4.4 release (like PEX, etc.), mostly because it was obsolete. Only a few files in the XFree86 codebase had the widely disliked new license.License issues
Do you mean color management has been removed? I agree that it was mis-CIE
designed but I know quite a few applications use it if only to allow users
to specify colors in different colorspaces.
Do you mean color management has been removed?
XIE, not CIE
PEX, for one, was long dead (I think XFree86-4.2.x ditched it). This just ditches some remnants.
X11R6.7 Release Notes
Note that one of the key enhancements is that
"only files without the new XFree86 1.1 license are included
in the X11R6.7.0 release."
We are finally seeing the results of David Dawes' extremely controversial
switch to a GPL-incompatible license.
Distributors are now abandoning XFree86, and it looks like
X.org will be (at least in the short term) the new home of X.
I've updated my
essay on GPL compatibility with a discussion on this.
My essay has said for years that GPL compatibility is important
for open source software / Free Software; this is an extraordinarily
clear example of that.
X11R6.7 Release Notes - note the dropping of the 1.1 license.
Yeah, isn't that funny. He wanted more recognition and now he's going to get less recognition. Looks like XFree86 is going nowhere fast. It is sad that developers with heaps of experience are lost over such trivial matters.
X11R6.7 Release Notes - note the dropping of the 1.1 license.
.. Of David Dawes.. Recognition and David Dawes
> He wanted more recognition and now he's
> going to get less recognition.
I don't know.. I do know that the name "David Dawes" has more name
recognition HERE now than it used to.. Of course, it's /infamous/,
not /famous/, recognition, much like, say, Daryl McBride, right now, only
not /quite/ to the same extent. <g>
Duncan
Too bad the previous license hurdles and forks have left some important people with a bad feeling of it all..X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
Another example from the past:
http://cbbrowne.com/info/x11r6.4.html
X11R6.4 license change
X11R6.4 license change
That's great news, but I can't help wondering why the press release is full of question marks where there should be quotation marks. Are they doing their X development on MS Windoze? :)X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
Interesting. I had noticed the funky characters when feeding the PR into the system, but firefox renders them as quotes so I left them as they were. Maybe I should fix them up...
Weird characters
The html source doesn't literally contain those characters, but instead it contains the so-called decimal entity references: “ and ”. I believe that that's the correct way of doing such things. (e.g. the euro symbol would be €)
Weird characters
When my Mozilla browser downloads the HTML, it has the byte codes 0x93 and 0x94 in those locations. Those are Windows codes, not part of the iso-8859-1 charset.
Weird characters
You are right, sorry for the confusion. After saving the page to a file, Firefox silently replaces the (invalid) character codes by the correct decimal references. Yeeks!
Weird characters
Yes, the safest way to insert curling quotation marks
is the decimal codes.
See
my paper on quotes in HTML, XML, and SGML for more information.
Weird characters - decimals are correct.
They are in Microsoft's own proprietary character set which is almost, butWeird characters
not quite, the same as ISO Latin-1. Most Microsoft products silently
insert these proprietary quotes if you have the smart quotes option turned
on. It's much better to use HTML entities with Unicode numbers for curly
quotes or to just use plain ASCII quotes. There's an old script call the
Demoronizer which fixes up problems like these.
They now interpret those quotes "correctly" even if the page's character
set marks those characters as reserved. Kind of sad actually.
That's what OpenOffice's HTML editor uses, so I've taken to using them in my own HTML, and
not found anything that blips yet. Konqeror seems to know enough to replace them with
straight quotes if the charset doesn't support them. What does your browser show?
“ ” ‘ ’ work on everything I have here
Yes, all those show up correctly. However the original document didn't use“ ” ‘ ’ work on everything I have here
them -- it used raw 8-bit characters in the reserved range. But as for what
HTML entities to use, “ is even more portable than “.
I don't see question marks... what browser are you using?X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
So what is the history of all this, where does Keith Packards early split fit with xouvert fit with X.org etc?X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
an X release in about 12 years." (from the posting by the finally? vindicated Keith Packard)
No-one currently associated with X.Org (that includes Keith) was associated X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
with Xouvert. Xouvert was led by Jonathan Walther, and its main developer was
William Lathi; it was a project that mainly lays idle after managing to convert
revision control systems. I believe it was due for release 2 a week ago now, but
the mailing lists have been silent for months.
> So what is the history of all this...X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
I was kind of hoping the kind Mr. Corbet would cover it in a featured article and clear up the issues, because he has all that power and influence and friends in high places and all.
</hint>
I seem to recall the news has been covered in the weekly issues several times.
X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
Yeah, i know that the initial dispute was covered and the possibility of forks and a fragmented user base were pondered, but that's not exactly what i was getting at. X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
Funny thing. As I was reading over the press release, the song "Ding, Dong, The Witch is Dead" kept floating through my mind.X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
Hopefully X.org will have the resources to update the documentation a bit. I'm still using the X11R5 Xlib reference manual by Ardian Nye, supplemented with freedesktop.org and a few other online resources. Having all the documentation up to date and in one place would be spiffy.
X.Org Foundation releases X Window System X11R6.7
Where are the O'Reilly books?
I thought only the X Consortium controlled the X11 revision numbers?Is X.org the X Consortium?
I thought that X.org was the Free Dekstop people and that x.org was the
X Consortium. Are they really the same organization?
Even better question: how can X11r6.7 be based on X11r6.6 from the same organization if this Is X.org the X Consortium?
is that organization's first release? :-)
You're trying to make sense of all the different X11 versions? You must be mad!Is X.org the X Consortium?
X.org has been releasing X versions all along, which XFree86 has been Is X.org the X Consortium?
taking and incorporating into their distributions. If you look at an
XFree86 distribution, it will have a set of release notes for the X.org
portion as well as the main release notes. It has been X.org's versions
of things like xrdb, xterm, xfontsel, etc. which you get if you get
XFree86. With this release, X.org has started releasing complete
distributions, including the stuff that XFree86 would formerly have
added. The last like this was done, the organization doing it was still
the X Consortium, so this is the first complete X distribution by X.org,
despite the fact that they've made a number of previous incomplete
distributions. The odd part is mainly that they've kept the same version
numbering when going from the incomplete distribution intended for
repackaging to the complete one intended for end users.
I see. So X.Org is the "new" X Consortium after being dormant for manyIs X.org the X Consortium?
years. I remember downloading X11R5 and compiling it for Ultrix and
later X11R6 for various systems. So it wasn't that the old ones weren't
intended for end users but the idea of an end user has changed a bit over
time.
>I see. So X.Org is the "new" X Consortium after being dormant for manyIs X.org the X Consortium?
>years.
"dormant" doesn't seem to describe it properly.
Perhaps "resurrected" is more apt: there's some
loss of continuity in action, but the players
are still the same.
There are a lot of people involved in X.Org who weren't involved in the XIs X.org the X Consortium?
Consortium for many reasons. Also, X.Org is far more open than the old XC.
>There are a lot of people involved in X.Org who weren't involved in the XIs X.org the X Consortium?
>Consortium for many reasons. Also, X.Org is far more open than the old XC.
I see that comment ("more open") too often without substantiation.
As for "a lot of people" - still no. Same people, different name.
Here's a start: myself, Egbert Eich, Mike Harris, Matthias Ettrich, Kevin Martin, Is X.org the X Consortium?
Stuart Anderson ... to my knowledge, none of these people were involved with the
X Consortium.
Oh, and as for the openness? Join the lists, and the organisation. Nominate for
the board or architecture group. Jump on the calls. Read the minutes of the calls
if you can't jump on. Anyone can do this.
Hell, hack on the code. The CVS repository, mailing lists, and bug tracking
system are all out there in the open. This wasn't true of the X Consortium, and
wasn't even true of XFree86 until very, very recently.
um - no. You're misunderstanding. Control was defined at the outset.Is X.org the X Consortium?
It'll take time to determine if it is open, or "open". Since there
have been no adverse events, it is meaningless to talk about how well
the proposed structure is doing.
>X.org has been releasing X versions all along, which XFree86 has been Is X.org the X Consortium?
>taking and incorporating into their distributions. If you look at an
>XFree86 distribution, it will have a set of release notes for the X.org
>portion as well as the main release notes. It has been X.org's versions
>of things like xrdb, xterm, xfontsel, etc. which you get if you get
>XFree86. With this release, X.org has started releasing complete.
not even close.
Well thanks for that informative post -- things are much clearer now. ;-)
Is X.org the X Consortium?
Since most of the comment was either misleading,Is X.org the X Consortium?
or incorrect, there was not much to elaborate upon.
So, um, if you believe the assertions made to be factually incorrect, and you believe yourself Is X.org the X Consortium?
to have proper factual information...
and you aren't going to bother to post it (or link to it) for our edification...
um, why are you here again?
> um, why are you here again?Is X.org the X Consortium?
hmm - since you don't know how to use google, start here:
And, oddly, there's nothing on that page to connect it with either you *or* the history of the Is X.org the X Consortium?
orgnization presently known as X.org. I guess I should have expected the ad-hominem from
someone as helpful as yourself, though.
> And, oddly, there's nothing on that page to connect it with either youIs X.org the X Consortium?
> *or* the history of the orgnization presently known as X.org. I guess
> I should have expected the ad-hominem from someone as helpful as
> yourself, though.
indeed. I gave you too much credit by assuming you could do your
own analysis (or had in fact read the comment to which I objected).
You know, it's strange.
Is X.org the X Consortium?
I pointed you at my home page for xterm. My name appearsIs X.org the X Consortium?
on the FAQ and CHANGE LOG pages from that point. Similarly,
if you chose to google on xterm, you would find my name. If
you had bothered to read the comment, it stated (among
other things):
>xfontsel, etc. which you get if you get XFree86.
you don't understand what you're saying, don't care if you
do, and are unlikely to change.
precisely as you're complaining about.
Arguing about this proves that you don't understand what you're saying, don't care if you
do, and are unlikely to change.
Is X.org the X Consortium?
Ok, I'll agree that people should generally do some more research before posting. But posts like this are as bad as mis-information.Is X.org the X Consortium?
http://www.opengroup.org/tech/desktop/Press_Releases/xccloses.htm
http://www.x.org/XOrg_background.html
>Ok, I'll agree that people should generally do some more research before >posting. But posts like this are as bad as mis-information.Is X.org the X Consortium?
Not exactly. What's obvious to me may not be obvious to you.
X.Org from X/Open from X Consortium, but the statement that XFree86 only
distributes applications that are "X.Org" got my attention. Since about
a third of the applications are modified by XFree86 (and most of the
remaining ones were not touched by anyone since ~1998), it was worth
pointing out that it was incorrect. (Saying it was "X.Org" doubled
the points since "X.Org" dates after the related code).
a new thread.
>The X Consortium maintained the specifications, backed by reference source >code. In 1996 it transferred that job to The Open Group which formed X.org >to take on the task. Now in 2004, that job will be done by the "X.Org >Foundation", which is really just a name change so that it can call it's >forked version of XFree86 "X.org". Are we confused yet?Is X.org the X Consortium?
Still a little confused: "X.Org" (the current one) dates from January.
The paperwork to set it up dates from last fall (September).
>I am guessing that you are "Thomas E Dickey", the maintainer for xterm for >XFree86.Is X.org the X Consortium?
yes
>If so, you are in a better position than any of us to enlighten us on the >relationship/history between X.org, the X Consortium, and XFree86. While I >don't expect you to post a 300-page history-of-X here, a couple of >sentances and URLs would have been helpful.
Probably not: describing the current X.org properly would require
some speculation on the dynamics of the situation. (I don't like
to speculate, and don't see any point in arguing about opinions).
That's enough to get up to about a year ago. Current events are
harder to report (every reporter thinks he's a general).
If I remember the discussions on the X.org mailing list correctly, this monolithic release is essentially only a stopgap measure—in the short term, they wanted to release something as close as possible to XFree86, as quickly as possible, to ensure that people have a stable platform to migrate to.
X.org plans to replace monolithic with modular tree in longer term