2011/10/12 Andrew Flegg <[email protected]>: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 20:55, Carsten Munk <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> "Initially the project will be developing a Core for basing products on >> and will split UX and hardware adaptations out into seperate projects >> within the community surrounding the Core." -- hence the "there's no >> "the" Mer Handset UX". >> >> There's some reasons why this split. [...] > > Thanks makes sense and is well explained. Having said that, I'd be > concerned that a small Core with a few hackers won't be possible to > gain enough momentum to capture a new middle-tier-or-above vendor. Honestly, I think where success lies is with small to medium vendors instead. That's who will have the most strength from this. Of course, the solutions that we intend to provide will be usable for bigger organisations too. > >> 2) We want to move much of the politics out of the Mer project and >> motivate people to create and build their own projects, though basing >> on Mer, much in the same way site projects are based upon Apache >> httpd. - we can't and don't want to govern projects utilizing the >> core, let them innovate on their own terms. > > Apache's an interesting choice of example given there *is* an > overarching "Apache" project and brand under which projects like JCL, > Tomcat, HTTPD, Commons Lang, Commons Collections and so on all > operate. Agreed, perhaps "Linux" would be a better comparison > >> There was a discussion about same topic some days back on IRC and the >> conclusion we reached was: [...] > > It's a little disappointing that so much is happening in realtime on > IRC, preventing those who can't participate 24x7 from contributing. > It's still a massive step-up on private conference calls within MeeGo, > but it is still a barrier to openness when ad-hoc discussions result > in decisions without any pre-prepared agenda. Even post-communication > to the mailing lists would be sufficent. Agreed - we had a hiccup with DNS so that's blocking Mer mailing lists for a little bit.
> Well put. But what is the success criteria? My suggestion would be > that a vendor is looking for an ecosystem-in-a-box whilst providing > the differentiation capabilities they feel they need to succeed in > their market. That means a good core; points where they can integrate > either an off-the-shelf OSS UI or build their own differentiating one; > good tools (both for app developers and their own developers looking > to adapt to their hardware) and an assurance that some things (e.g. > security updates for some packages) will be got "for free". Let's face it - if giant companies have difficulties making ecosystems, we'll have even more difficulties. What I think really has value is the fact that you can avoid hiring a lot of Linux people to maintain a simple stack. That it's easy to get things made - want an alarm clock? here, take a beagleboard and an LCD and some speakers, write some QML, there you go. > > A bootstrapping project which delivers a tight Linux userland with Qt > might not provide sufficient leg up for it to appear on a list of > options compared with the perceived "weight" of Ubuntu/Debian/... (or > even, heaven forbid, Tizen). The problem is, again that if those solutions are really so great and easy, why aren't people having an easy time building products using these things? With Tizen, it's vaporware right now. But we intend on utilizing Tizen in the core where possible - our angle is just ease through Qt instead and a open innovative process. > > So, I suppose my question is: what's the perceived problem? How does > Mer address it? How is success measured? And is Core the focus because > it's the right answer for the perceived problem or because it's > pragmatically the thing which can be delivered now? Success for Mer is measured in people using it to innovate and for people to make prototypes and products using it. The Core is the focus as this is the simple thing many really lust for is a simple, easy-to-port working Linux platform, openly developed and governed that doesn't rely on the whims of corporate choices and roadmaps, that you can build your business on without risking bankruptcy at every new keynote opportunity. Success for myself is if I have a stable foundation for my business to make products in a world like in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 - and having fun developing the core at same time. BR Carsten Munk > > Cheers, > > Andrew > > -- > Andrew Flegg -- mailto:[email protected] | http://www.bleb.org/ > _______________________________________________ MeeGo-handset mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-handset
