On Monday 20 September 2010 01:30:18 you wrote: > Again we are basically back to two types of "compliant" apps. I strongly > believe that is a mistake we cannot afford to make - we need to avoid > fragmenting our application ecosystem.
We know we want to have bundled commercial apps targeting stores. We know we want to have a repository/repositories (Extras/Surrounds/Staging/whatever) using OSS practices on meego.com. How does declaring only one of those MeeGo compliant reduce fragmentation (already present over hardware architecture and device UX/profile) in any way ? > > Then get the Marketing team to decide on how those MeeGo Core Apps will > > be branded in the outside world. My suggestion: "MeeGo World -- a > > world of apps for all MeeGo devices". The MeeGo 1.1 version of the > > branding rules will state that only apps that meet the defintion of > > "MeeGo Core Apps" can call themselves "MeeGo World" apps. > > I want to make the marketing team job really simple - market "MeeGo > Compliant Applications" How about we use the name "MeeGo Store Compliant" ? Since that's what this is really about. That way meego.com/community repositories are not labeled with the derogatory "not MeeGo Compliant" stamp, vendors can decide whether they want to be MeeGo Store Compliant or 'meego.com' compliant anyway, MeeGo is not ridiculed to be the only Linux distro in the known universe whose compliancy program does not allow non-system dependencies, and marketing can happily chirp with a single, non-technical message ? Best regards, Attila Csipa _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
