[Compcomm] CompComm has a real name!

[Diogo Ferreira]

Using http://fusion.compiz.org would be better from every point of view, it
would demonstrate that it is a compiz project and that it's not any kind of
fork, I think you all agree on this.

Diogo

On 6/21/07, Jeffrey Laramie <imnotpc at rock3d.org> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 20 June 2007 17:12, Quinn Storm wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007 17:02:36 RYX wrote:
> > > Only for my curiosity - opencompositing.org is now meant to be become
> > > compiz-fusion.org? Or why has "compcomm" been changed to "Compiz
> Fusion"
> > > everywhere? Wasn't it meant to become a general compositing-related
> > > forum?
> >
> > I think (and hope) that the compiz-fusion "rename" only applies to
> > (some/all) of the work that will be released as compiz-fusion (i.e. the
> > compiz enhancements/etc.), as there's no reason for it to apply to
> anything
> > else.
> >
> > I think the idea is that compcomm referred to what will now be
> > compiz-fusion, while opencompositing (the site where compcomm was[is]
> > hosted) is the umbrella group to handle general Free Software
> compositing,
> > and so the rename is just for the compiz extensions, not
> > opencompositing.org which is still to exist and to fulfill that mission.
>
> Yes, this is how I understand it as well. Nothing has changed as far as
> the
> definition or scope of the reunited project: Compiz(-Extra) + Beryl =
> CompComm = Compiz Fusion. Opencompositing.org will be available to
> host/support compositing projects that are not specifically related to
> Compiz. iXce and onestone can describe the goals of opencompositing.org
> better than I can, but I don't think that it has any effect on what Compiz
> Fusion does.
>
> The only potential question I see here is something that doesn't matter in
> today's discussion, but is something we as a community need to think about
> down the road. The original definition of Compiz Fusion included the
> possibility of including DE features. These programs would most likely not
> be
> specifically dependant on Compiz so there may eventually be a question
> about
> which project is more appropriate to host them. Again, none of those
> projects
> actually exist yet so this isn't a discussion we need to have now as far
> as I
> can see.
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> CompComm mailing list
> CompComm at Rock3d.org
> http://www.ubaight.com/mailman/listinfo/compcomm
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.RiverGorgeSolutions.net/pipermail/compcomm/attachments/20070621/66fee0c7/attachment-0002.htm>