On 10/01/2011 04:13 PM, Gabriel Beddingfield wrote:
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Dayo<roneywo...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Fine... pick IVI. Pick *something*.
MeeGo's complexity ({Netbook,Handset,IVI,Tablet} x {i586,armv7} x
{MeeGoCompliance,PlatformCompliance,DeviceCompliance}) was apparently too
much to bear even with corporate sponsorship. If you continue as a
community project, it's important to narrow this down in order to
succeed.
++1 That is why I said so the first place. Trying to do everything and
in the same time proved us very wrong.
I don't see a problem with keeping the various implementations of MeeGo
alive, if there are people interested in contributing to them. Naturally, if
a project receives no active contributions it goes stale and dies, but why
kill it preemptively?
Many of us believe that supporting all the verticals and profiles
failed because it fragmented developers... and there were not enough
developers to support it all. I honestly believe that it is a large
reason why MeeGo has been more or less floundering.
With Intel removing the lion's share of those developer resources...
it would be foolish to continue that failed approach. It sets
everyone up for failure.
By re-focusing the goals to ONE THING... the hard-to-rely-on community
development model (*cough*Debian*cough*) has a reasonable chance of
accomplishing those goals. Once achieved, you may find room to re-add
those other verticals on top of a stable foundation.
-gabriel
I don't understand what you mean by fragmented developers. There are
developers working on various MeeGo implementations, due to their
interests in the respective implementations. I don't see how that can be
called fragmentation. Fragmentation would be, e.g. if you had several
developers working on different variations of the same GSM modules.
If there are developers currently working on handset, and they wish to
continue this work, then let them. If there are developers currently
working on tablet or IVI, and they want to keep developing for these,
then why stop them? Closing off access to various portions of what is
supposed to be an open-source project is counterintuitive, especially at
a time when MeeGo has been abandonned by Nokia/Intel.
What we need now more than ever is to *attract* active development, not
stifle it.
Dayo
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
MeeGo-dev@meego.com
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
