Re: xouvert? (was Re: Cygwin/XFree86 - No longer associated withXFree86.org)

[David Fraser <davidf at sjsoft dot com>]

Harold L Hunt II wrote:

> Mitch,
>
> Mitchell Skinner wrote:
>
> > I followed the forum@xfree86.org discussion and the xwin.org and
> > xouvert.org bits, and at first I wasn't sure if the complainers had a
> > real beef or if the hubbub was the outcome of some bizarre historical
> > politics, but it's becoming clearer and clearer that the xfree86 guys
> > are dropping the ball.  Lots of long-time, serious contributors are all
> > saying the same thing; hopefully all those that have a problem with the
> > old system can get together and start a single new mainline rather than
> > splinter into a bunch of different groups.
>
>
> It looks like people are regrouping.  Keith Packard and Jim Gettys are 
> over at freedesktop.org.  They have most of the libs (that aren't 
> maintained elsewhere) imported and autotooled.  I think that is going 
> to be my long-term destination for our bits... but I am going to work 
> in an xc/ style repository in the mean time.  It will take a few 
> months to whip the autotooled build into shape, and I don't want to 
> forgo having a CVS tree during that period.
>
> xouvert is using Arch.  I am not really familiar with Arch; I don't 
> even know if it works on Cygwin.  I personally don't think I would 
> have the time to invest in setting up and maintaining a version of the 
> code in xouvert... but I would not be opposed to someone else doing 
> this and tracking my patches.  That would be advantageous to us and them.

I've tried Arch, but quite a while ago.
It has some fantastic features, much much better than CVS.
Unfortunately though it wasn't working with cygwin then, but can't say 
if that's been fixed.
I think it was mostly due to them choosing strange names for directories 
like {arch} etc.

David