On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 04:23:30PM +0200, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Just because connman is a small component and has a fairly self-contained API > and predictable behaviour, it's not an exception to the rule. You must use > the > components, all of them, in the same versions.
Ah, so the same will be said for banshee and evolution as well? Oh wait, I see people replacing them already and no one putting up such a stink. Now why is that... > If an exception to connman is opened, then another will turn up for > bash, one for uclibc, and so forth, to the point that it fragments the > stack. Sounds good to me :) Seriously, the main issue here is the insistance that one must follow the rules, only to have the question "what are the rules" be answered as "we are still trying to figure that out, wait a few months." That doesn't work for a product that is currently shipping. And, to answer the private question a few people have asked me, "why are you asking all of these questions, why not just not use the MeeGo name at all?" Well, it's about recognizing the contributions of those that you build something on. I know not all people/companies do that all the time (present drivers of MeeGo included), but some of us want to do the "right thing" here. Unfortunately, they are making it impossible for us to do so, so I'm thinking that you will start to see "netbook" like respins of Fedora and openSUSE and other distros that might happen to look like they came from the MeeGo codebase, but not mention MeeGo at all. Sad it's had to come to this. bah, greg k-h _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
