On Sep 16, 2010, at 12:10 AM, Marius Vollmer wrote:

> "ext Skarpness, Mark" <[email protected]> writes:
> 
>> But my point was really that this decision does matter and does have
>> an impact - if we allow applications to have external dependencies
>> then someone has to pay to host them in a commercially scalable and
>> reliable way.
> 
> What about _internal_ dependencies?  Should we allow applications to
> have dependencies to other packages in the same store?
>From a compliance point of view, the application needs to be self-contained 
>(i.e. have no external dependencies that are not satisfied by the MeeGo 
>required on-device package set).  Compliance does not dictate the mechanics of 
>how a compliant app is delivered to a device.
> 
> I think this is up to the store, but the MeeGo package management should
> be prepared for it.
> 
> 
> Or in other words, if MeeGo doesn't get a credible Extras or Surrounds
> happen itself, others will hopefully do it without us, and we should at
> least not make it unecessarily hard for them to use dependencies between
> their packages.  They might want to have their own UI for discovering
> things in their repository, but they should not need to implement their
> own package manager, of course.
I'm not aware of any technical issues in making extras or surrounds work - what 
we are discussing is whether or not compliance will mandate that every device 
must support external dependencies for compliant apps.
> 
> If MeeGo gets a credible Extras / Surrounds going, we need to support
> dependencies anyway (because without them I wouldn't call it credible).

_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to