>From my point of view, I'd like to get a list of the specific issues the wine >guys have, and work through that list resolving each issue in turn - either by >modifying the code or demonstrating that the concern is unfounded. If neither >of these is possible, then we need to make a call one way or another.
Looking back at the emails what I have so far is concern about the file "tpf.h". I'd like to understand whether people actually think that this has been created improperly, or rather that people believe that it is actually legal but does not meet wine's standards and that those standards should also now apply to mesa. IE. are we: (a) being alterted to improperly authored code, or (b) being asked to impose new restrictions on our project to fit in with the choices of another one? These are two quite different conversations, and I'd like to understand which one we're having. Keith ________________________________________ From: mesa-dev-bounces+keithw=vmware....@lists.freedesktop.org [mesa-dev-bounces+keithw=vmware....@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Jose Fonseca [jfons...@vmware.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 7:33 AM To: Corbin Simpson Cc: mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [Mesa-dev] D3D1x Revert Either WINE developers or Luca will feel alienated. So, I think the discussion should be *now*, before taking further decision. Personally, I still don't understand what's special about this code. If no Microsoft code was ever copied or used in d3d1x then I don't see how WINE developers are tainted by the d3d1x state tracker presence than by the other stuff in master now. As I said before, we all read third party NDA hardware specs and reference code in the past. It is standard practice. Several other members of the community had to reverse engineer hardware operation. I think it would be dishonest to allows ourselves this much so far, and refuse Luca's code because he read publicly available Microsoft docs or reference code. My understanding is that this is more than about legality of this code: Microsoft can sue whoever they want, with or without legal basis, and WINE developers want to publicly show beyond doubt that they we're not near even miles from Microsoft code, to deter Microsoft to sue them, and so incur in legal expenses. But I don't see how we can accommodate that, and continue to maintain that Gallium is about the abstraction of many graphic APIs and many OSes. Even Mesa was always about many OSes too. Personally, I'd like to encourage initiatives of supporting more APIs and more OSes to Mesa/Gallium such as this one. And to be honest, WINE developers did a disservice to themselves by openly stating their concerns. They put themselves between the rock and the wall with that. For future reference, if people have this sort of doubts, they should contact the project maintainers (e.g Brian, Keith) privately. Jose ________________________________________ From: mesa-dev-bounces+jfonseca=vmware....@lists.freedesktop.org [mesa-dev-bounces+jfonseca=vmware....@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Corbin Simpson [mostawesomed...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 23:23 To: mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: [Mesa-dev] D3D1x Revert Can I revert this merge out of master? The Wine developers that contribute to Mesa are feeling very alienated by this code, and I think that it could stand to have some more discussion, especially about its legality. ~ C. -- When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir? ~ Keynes Corbin Simpson <mostawesomed...@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
