[somat]

I remember xfree86, not that there was anything wrong with it, it just was not really doing anything. Then xorg showed up, I am not sure from where but they had an amazing domain name. And there was this energy present, this brought a lot of improvement. The one that directly effected me is how they pretty much removed the need for a xf86.conf. and when it is needed you only need to fill the section needed instead of the whole thing.

Anyway this energy is missing from from xorg these days, there is no corporate sponsor anymore. the project is sleeping. Which is a shame, I like X.

There is a quote.

  Around computers it is difficult to find the correct unit of time to
  measure progress.  Some cathedrals took a century to complete.  Can you
  imagine the grandeur and scope of a program that would take as long?
              -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982

Well we have our cathedrals of software, I think of X as one. both a relic of a forgotten age and a structure fit for modern usage. However, people appear to want to label these as "legacy systems" and tear them down.

[0x2b9fd814feb0]

From memory, some developers were unhappy with a closed off xfree86 mailing-list related to development, it's slow progress, the coming re-licensing to something ridiculous, like a regression in licensing to include advertising clauses.

I was also elated with the energy behind the new X.org, most xfree86 developers moved with it too, many wonderful changes came out of the separation, and some churn and pain.