meego-architecture-boun...@lists.meego.com wrote: > Hello, > > We encountered some matters with the recent MeeGo 1.1 Compliance > Specification (draft 1.0.99.3) that would be nice to be clarified. Is > there someone who could comment on these? > > > 1) Specific definition of Platform API > > Line 279: > "The Platform API consists of public interfaces from all libraries > provided by MeeGo Core (see Appendix A)." > > As the packages in Appendix A have been split to "core" and > "dep(endencies)" categories, and the "dep" packages are included in > MeeGo mostly due to being the dependencies for required core packages, > and interesting question emerges: Does the Platform API consist of > public APIs of just the "core" packages in list, or both "core" and > "dep" packages?
Both. The core/dep column is intended only as a guide as to why a package is present in the required list, not to provide any sort of recommendation. > 2) Inclusion of X.org in the Platform API > > In chapter 2.5 Graphical Subsystem, seems that OpenGL ES support is not > required to be tied to X11 in any way (on EGL level window/display > tidbits obviously need to be adapted for whatever there is as the window > system, but that does not concern application developers). For the > ordinary UI level code then, Qt 4.7 is there in the MeeGo API. Looks > like there is no definite need for X11 to be part of the API, even > though it of course can be part of the underlying implementation. > > However, an X11 implementation (specifically X.org) is present in the > Platform API. > > What are the reasons to provide any layers below Qt and OpenGL ES for > the 3rd party developers to use? Supporting the use of X11 calls > directly from 3rd party applications creates an unnecessary X11 lock-in > for cases, where a MeeGo-compliant product could be otherwise done with > a much more streamlined (and better performing) architecture. Are 3rd > party developers expected to use X11 for some specific purposes in their > new code, or is this more of an attempt to ease porting of legacy > applications to the platform? Some of the platforms may well eventuall not have X11 underneath, so you're right about this. I think opinions were somewhat divided for a while about whether "the whole stack" was allowable, or whether it should be more limited. For this version at least, the choice was that if it's in the required set you can use it - but whether you *should* use it is a different question. You've highlighted a reason why one might not, and why the "Platform API" comes with much weaker guarantees than the "MeeGo API". Hopefully the SDK and checker tools will be able to provide "portability advice" in a sensible fashion to help with this. > P.S. Sorry about posting on two separate mailing lists; was a bit unsure > on how much people follow meego-architecture list. Followups to just the > meego-architecture list perhaps. although it's in a sense an architectural topic, compliance questions have lived on meego-dev so far so I've actually sent it there. _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
