Slashdot Mirror


A Look at the Compiz and Beryl Merger

invisibastard writes to mention that Linux Tech Daily has an editorial on the merger between Compiz and Beryl. "This state of affairs was a shame. Something that was finally getting the general public excited about Linux, the 3D desktop, was wasting time with duplication of effort and fighting. There were concerns about the long term viability of Beryl. The perception in the community overall was, Compiz = old and stale, Beryl = fresh and exciting. This despite the feeling in the Compiz community that the "real work" was being done by David Reveman and Compiz, and there were exciting things with Compiz core (like input redirection, etc...) on the horizon."

4 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. Good for them by reldruH · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's really great to see this. One of linux's greatest weaknesses is the amount of duplication that happens. Sometimes it's necessary but a lot of the time the community would be better served by everybody working together instead of against each other. This is one of those times and I applaud the beryl and compiz devs for realizing that and having the good sense to swallow a little bit of their pride on both sides. I'm looking forward to the great things that will come out of this.

    --
    I've always pictured the color of OS zealotry as a sort of bright flamingo pinkish hue
  2. Re:Frosty piss! by mickwd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't agree that "[the world] needs everyone working to create a single comprehensive distro". Personally, I think choice is good, and that alternatives can compete against each other, each try out different ideas, and stimulate and improve each other.

    What does a "distribution" or "operating system" mean to a large number of computer users ? Nothing. They just see it as part of "the way the computer works". So why do we need more than one operating system ? So let's extend your argument to cover operating systems:

    I think that in the [computing] world, mergers are a good thing and need to be made across the entire [computing] community. Imagine if the [Windows] and [Linux] camps could work together... or how about [Windows] and [Linux]... or most importantly the [software installation] camps.

    Want to bring [computing] to the mainstream, pick a standard and develop it. Set aside your disagreements and work for the greater good. The world doesn't need another [operating system], it needs everyone working to create a single comprehensive [operating system].

    I hate it when I find a piece of software I want, only to discover there is no binary for my chosen [operating system]. I don't hate it because I don't know how to compile it myself, but because I shouldn't have to.

    I hate that I can only seem to get hardware drivers for [windows] because the vendor couldn't cater to everyone.

    And I hate hearing about projects forking because two intelligent people can't come to a compromise.

    Choice is good... but only when there is at least one option that meets the need. Too often there is so much competition that none of the products can really fulfill the needs they set out to fulfill because there are not enough developers to go around.


    So......pursuing your argument a little further, should we all just use windows ????

  3. This is not a 3D desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Compiz and Beryl are mostly eye candy. I don't see much useful in either. Metisse looks much more interesting. I'm anxiously awaiting the release of Mandriva 2007.1.

  4. The war between Compiz and Beryl was productive by g2devi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Contrary to what is claimed, the war between Compiz and Beryl was productive. It did three things:
    1) Forced David and friends to restructure his development process to be more like Beryl's
    2) Forced Quinn and friends to realize that maybe David was right on some issues
    3) Allowed Beryl to experiment with alternative ways of developing Compiz without destroying Compiz's approach.

    Okay, maybe the conflict was a bit less civilized that than it could have been, but sometimes you need a good fight to raise the issues and so you can look for ways to solve them. You can't fix what you won't even acknowledge. The approach taken before the split up was disfunctional and didn't give people what they wanted. It's likely the new approach will be a lot better since it'll allow David to focus on what he's best at and Quinn to focus on what he's best at without stepping on each other's feet.