On 9/16/2010 11:44 AM, David Greaves wrote:
On 16/09/10 19:09, Skarpness, Mark wrote:
If the 2nd differs because it "depends" on the first one then what
additional burden exists?
As we have discussed repeatedly - the burden that a device must
provide a way
to install the second app (or dependency).
Can we agree our goals?
I think we need to achieve 2 things:
* permit the open-source development model to work for compliant
applications
I strongly object to the use of the term "open source" here.
It's not open source, it's not even about the development model.
It's about a componentized application with cross app shared components.
* define the spec in a way to minimise the imposed burden on vendors
It's not about minimizing the burden (although that's part of it). It's
about having something that is viable and interesting
for vendors and operators alike. These guys have a set of strong desires
that you need to be able to meet to have a product
(and meego is just a component of such a product) that interests them.
I know a lot of people here don't like or agree with that model. But the
model is just market reality right now.
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
