Well, I've read all the arguments, and I think I may have been being overly
cautious. It is indeed a concern that we might lose our freedom in
a 'merge', but I have been convinced that it isn't a major concern (and of
course we reserve the right to re-fork).
We do indeed need to choose a third, new name in a merge, and of course
(again) rename the beryl-named components, for the obvious reasons.
I hope that we can execute this in a way that the average user sticks with it
and isn't overwhelmed / doesn't feel left behind.
The only real question in my mind right now is what we should do at/about UDS.
I am sure there is still reason for us to attend, as I doubt the merge will
be complete by then, especially with so much code, and so many processes to
go through. I also believe that beryl's user-focused model is better for
Ubuntu, and that having Beryl devs going will give Ubuntu a good working
relationship with people in the new project who can keep things on track for
them and their goals (and especially their users)
I know this is kinda a flip-flop from my last position, but its because I
actually have paid attention to what the various people have commented on the
obby document, etc.
I hope for good things in the future for all of us.
http://lists.beryl-project.org/pipermai ... 00356.html
New Name Coral it sounds like and sounds like they are gonna focus on Ubuntu