On Friday 17 September 2010 20:29:06 you wrote:
> On the other hand, what are the deep issues underneath this long
> discussion? Let me try:
> 
> - The belief that the MeeGo official AOPI is not enough to satisfy
> developers. If this is true then it's a problem in itself and needs to
> be fixed by improving the API.

It cannot be fixed through the API for 2 major reasons:

- you are bloating the API to kitchensink proportions. Every API class you add 
in means more hardware requirements for *everyone* and, on the long term, 
makes maintenance more and more difficult (as you promised API stability)

- the API update cycle is too slow. The libraries you would be wrapping have 
their own release cycles - add the MeeGo development, freeze, QA, and it means 
you are dealing with stuff from a year ago in no time
 
> - The belief that there will be a significant amount of apps using other
> APIs / toolkits. Which ones, though? PySide? KDE libs? Hildon? This
> discussion would be better grounded if sustained by real maintainers of
> these toolkits & bindings.

My scripts show that 60%+ of ALL Maemo applications depend on at least one 
package which is not found in the firmware or manufacturer repo. (am playing 
with some repo stats to gauge extras-testing status). And that's with plain 
Hildon and Ovi apps in the 'compliant' camp. Another number that might be of 
interest - these apps account for 75% of the 30+ million downloads on 
maemo.org

> - Even the perception that the Compliance restrictions go somehow
> against free software development. I would accept this one if the MeeGo
> project would refuse the idea of hosting an own Extras/Surrounds repo.
> But if this exists then developers concerned about software freedom can
> use them, and users concerned about software freedom can buy devices
> open enough to run that software.

In any case, I see some mis-alignment between what you say and:

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Skarpness, Mark <[email protected]> 
wrote:
>> If compliant apps are allowed to have external dependencies - then
>> someone has to pay to host and maintain those dependencies so they are
>> available worldwide to many millions of devices.
>
> Won't that be the MeeGo repository?

No, probably not - the meego project infrastructure is not set up to support 
commercial product deployments.  The device vendor and / or service provider 
would need to host this (as they would also host updates, etc).

SNIP




Best regards,
Attila Csipa
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to