non-Unity flavours and Mir

Jussi Schultink jussi01 at
Wed May 15 17:43:54 UTC 2013

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Jeremy Bicha <jbicha at> wrote:

> On May 15, 2013 12:29 PM, "Jonathan Riddell" <jr at> wrote:
> > needing to kill and start a new graphics server is a new requirement
> > and quite a user-unfriendly one, it would need thinking how to make it
> > as elegant as possible.
> Yes but that's the worst-case. Ideally LightDM would be the one display
> manager that supports *everything*. I mean already GNOME doesn't work as
> well without GDM but that's not really Canonical's fault.
> > >    And the flavor community may need to depend on Debian instead of
> Canonical
> > >    to maintain X and Wayland?
> >
> > Yes but Canonical already patches mesa and X to suit Unity making bugs
> > appear in at least KWin exclusively on Kubuntu, this is likely to
> > increase.  What if Debian is frozen?
> Maybe less patching of X would be needed? Of course past experience tells
> us that Qt patching will increase as Ubuntu uses it more.

Are the patches such that we can pick and choose to maintain Mesa-kubuntu
or Mesa-basic or so? My understanding was that if the patches aren't
upstreamable, then they are kept in a branch so can't we just cherry pick
what we like? (yes, spoken by a true non-dev...)

> > Feel free to take this to ubuntu-devel, I was thinking a vUDS session
> > would be a good way to start the discussion but probably I was too late
> for that.
> Sorry I don't have the time now to champion this discussion.
> Thanks
> Jeremy

Overall, I'd like to see this talked about at vUDS, even though I'm
travelling and likely will have little input myself.


> --
> kubuntu-devel mailing list
> kubuntu-devel at
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the kubuntu-devel mailing list