From: Emmanuel Marty <core@ggi-project.org>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:15:09 +0200

Re: Libggi and KGI (was: Re: kgi vs. fbcon)

smoke@casema.net wrote:

> I guess it'd be best for the GGI project to split KGI and libGGI up even more
> given of course this is possible. I run libGGI happily for more than a year now
> I think. With KGI, without KGI using svgalib, sometimes in X11 to demonstrate
> at someone else's et cetera. LibGGI is really stable the moment, and can be
> used to create a lot of cool applications. So I think KGI is `in the way` for
> getting a large userbase there. People interested in specific KGI functionality
> are pleased at the very first sight and will never be blocked by libGGI of
> course, but the other way around might be the problem..

We did split them, if you look at our current CVS sources. libggi is stand
alone, compilation wise, and KGI is no more. KGIcon has taken over, and this
one is really a breeze to setup, provided we put the right docs in the right
place, and we do some seamless integration with the kernel makefiles, and
we eventually provide precompiled modules even.

I do agree about the 0.0.8/0.0.9 being the image people have of GGI.
That's why, I think, it's time for a stable release quickly, for one, and 
for GGI version 0.1.0, codename Degas, to come out by the end of this
year, for two.

> Just my humble opinion ...

And thanks for expressing it. All are welcome.

--
Emmanuel