On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:41:29AM +0800, Daniel van Vugt wrote: > Yeah, very good point about "gbm". That confused me when I joined to > project too. It should be called "dri", I think.
What about just "mesa"? I think "mesa" is more recognizable, and adequately descriptive of the backend's target driver model and APIs. I don't think Mesa has or will have significant competing non-dri backends. Having said that, I am fine with either "dri" or "mesa". Whatever the final choice, I think this is something we are better off doing early in the cycle (i.e. soon), since it's when we have a window for non-feature oriented work. Thanks, Alexandros -- Mir-devel mailing list Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
