Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I'm not convinced any lines need to be drawn. We should cater for whatever people want to talk about. If it's not a common interest, those threads will have (0 replies) and no harm done. Seriously, am I the only one that still uses internettablettalk.com ?

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

maemo = Live your dream
meego = Dream your life
--------------------------
I would rather making a better os from maemo and talk all around the forum about it and leave Meego to (strictly) its section

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I think my bookmark is still pointed to http://www.internettablettalk.com/forums . It redirects to tmo now.

Sometimes I still wonder if we'll go back to the more os agnostic ways before the itt->maemo shift...

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

:D Let me rephrase this. talk.maemo.org is way too specific if other stuff is to be included, such as MeeGo. I really don't care what OS'es are included (or allowed, or appropriate or politically correct by consensus on this board or liked by the moderators or whatever), but please don't call it maemo-something. The only thing in common is the N900, why not call it that? (I know what will respond, so please don't...)

List of appropriate conduct regarding OS'es on TMO:
Maemo - yes (but criticism of the OS and the apps is NOT allowed)
MeeGo - yes (but criticism of the non-working OS and questions regarding why it never is working is NOT allowed)
WP - yes (but ONLY criticism is allowed, must also include Elop is a fart)
Android - somewhat allowed, but keep it quiet.
iOS - not considered an OS.
Symbian - 95% don't have the faintest idea what Symbian really is anyway around here, but it's Nokia so OK.
Bada - Never mention Bada, you get refraction points mentioning it, I did.

Good day :D

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

That's fine. Now let ME correct the below:

False. True criticism is always allowed. Bashing, trolling and juvenile behaviors are not.

Again false. Same principles as applied to Maemo discussion.

I have to assume you're being purely facetious there so no comment.

False. Just keep the Android discussion in the appropriate section OR use it elsewhere in reasonable contexts.

What???

That 95% figure is far off the mark.

False. Refraction points are given for rules violations, not mere mention of an OS. If you were the one spamming with "bada rox!" tags, that may have been the reason. Regardless, it wasn't for anything as innocent as you allege.

EDIT: d'oh! INfraction points (thanks sjgadsby)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I believe the OP intended those points as a humorous/sarcastic remark.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I started out thinking so, myself, but the bada mark persuaded me otherwise. But if ericsson says I got it wrong (and he didn't earlier, when he was here), I will gladly acknowledge that. The problem is I've seen those points seriously alleged too many times here...

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Yes, watch yourself or I'll raise your refractive index again.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I don't think that will help him focus :)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

lol... I can't believe I missed that...

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Infraction points for something. This thread is cursed. I need to stay away fr.o.m. It.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

On the other hand, refractory points are good against flaming...

I don't understand why meego discussion is such a touchy topic for some of the community members. At worst it makes things a bit confusing when mixed in with with maemo discussion.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

It becomes a touchy subject because we have members who spread misinformation.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Yeah, I hate that it has got so political. It's getting to the point where MeeGo and Symbian (at least in this forum) are thought of as being synonymous in quality. Which just isn't true, MeeGo N900 CE is really great at the moment, and getting better everyday. We just need developers to start porting apps so it's not such a barren landscape :)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

If MeeGo did live up to its hype and was at least somewhat usable by now, this wouldn't be a touchy subject.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

It is more than usable at the moment. Oh look, that misinformation I was talking about.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I am using MeeGo 1.1 very well on my Lenovo netbook. Issues are minor, and no worse than those encountered on much more mature platforms.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I also have MeeGo on my HP mini, but I never use it because Joli Cloud is much better in just about every single aspect (I am being dead honest and objective now). Joli Cloud is made for end users, and work straight out of the box, with MeeGo I have to manually compile (yes - compile) and then install the network drivers to have any sort of functional netbook. Obviously compiling the network drivers is only for the geeky minority.

Anyway, I was talking about MeeGo on the N900 (phone, GSM, talk, MMS, 3G, ARM etc), not MeeGo for X86.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Pretty much all the normal phone functionality works. Power saving isn't bad, not quite as good as Maemo but I've been using one of my N900s with MeeGo CE on it for about a month, as a primary phone (my personal one, I use another with maemo for work).

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

That's why I don't have meego on my netbook :/

but MeeGo CE is improving fast imo.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I voted as a qualified maybe, so here's a quote, then my comment:

I shockingly (and probably for the first time ever) agree with abill on this topic. I love the idea of MeeGo, and encourage people to post information about it in the forum(s). I'd love to see it succeed, and I read the MeeGo sub-forum occasionally to stay current, see screen shots, videos, etc.

That said, there has been a core of people whom, out of excitement for the project or for more personal reasons, have been hyping it as the cure for all ills of the N900. That's not good when it's done for any particular sub-group, be that NIT, Bada, MeeGo, oFono, QtMoko, or even CSSU.

Talking about something in context on occasion is fine. Mentioning someone has old info, with a link to where to find current info, fine. Providing current information about the state of things (which one member who has since left did), very informative and fine. High-jacking a thread in another sub-forum, on another topic (even one with a mis-guided topic/poll :rolleyes:) and debating over 30+ posts with the thread OP over a difference of opinion is a bit over the line though.

I'm frankly surprised that infraction points weren't given to everyone involved for that, vs just the OP. I think in any other thread, there would have been a few people with a day or two of "down time". (How many have gotten infraction points on this thread for simply disagreeing with the op so far?)

So, yes, discuss it. Yes, talk about it. But please don't keep insisting it's super-wonderful and better than anything else available in every thread where it's even slightly mentioned.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

And now I wildly diverge and hop into something I probably shouldn't:

As you said earlier, "If that's how you feel, then that is unfortunate."

I feel, like many, that MeeGo has taken too long to get to the meager point it's at right now. Despite your insistence otherwise, it still has several issues on the N900, many of which were talked about at the most recent conference. Even the presenters indicated that this is not ready for general consumption nor every-day use on the N900, yet. MMC vanishing at times, SMS not alerting, Wifi is unstable, and the accelerometer sensors are still not working. You'll note that I included links to the open bugs on the live bug database to indicate where I get my info on this from, since you've been claiming people aren't current on the status of DE/CE when saying things don't work.

Again, I hope it improves, and that the bug count goes down. It's already surpassed the capabilities of many of it's predecessors on other platforms (OpenMoko comes to mind). But it's simply not solid enough for most people to switch over to for daily use right now. Saying otherwise is the same trap parents fall into claiming their kid is "special". In this case, the "special kid" is MeeGo and it just got a C-. Followed by a small chunk of the devel community is screaming "What?! It should have gotten at least a B+ or even an A!" You don't get to grade your own kid for a reason... (Even home-schoolers have standardized tests.)

The same was said for Android. The same has been said about many systems with semi-closed bits. Open is open, closed is closed, mixed is mixed. Maemo and MeeGo are both shades of mixed, since as you noted, parts of both are only available via NDA. That's a reality that's yet to be broken (even by OM), since some hardware bits are closed by their very nature (e.g. GSM). MeeGo has a more open UI, great. But it's hardware level stuff is just about on par with Maemo as far as what's open and whats still under NDA (aka closed). Slant the glass all you want, in the end it's not completely open, and probably never will be.

So... That's my say on the issue. Take it as you will. I don't suspect much will change here, even with the rash of points and suspensions going on. But at least I got my two cents in before being banned. :p

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

You raise fair points, MeeGo up until 2 1/2 months ago on the N900 was at the whim of contributors who were mostly scratching itches and getting odd bits & bogs working. When Nokia got involved and created the N900 Community Edition project (previously Developer Edition), we suddenly got a huge amount of momentum, because for the first time we actually had clear goals and targets. And they were simple and achievable. So recently MeeGo for the N900 has become a much more active and viable option.

I guess there's a misconception of what we're doing here. We've always said MeeGo on the N900 will never be ready for "end users" it's not yet and probably never will be a goal for the project. And that is probably fundamentally the issue when posting things about MeeGo on this forum. There are a lot of vocal users, who feel Nokia have burned them somehow and think we're trying to create something for them in MeeGo, well, we're not. When I talk about MeeGo on talk.maemo.org, I'm targetting the developers, we need people to port apps to the platform and help us make it more complete, so we're trying to attract more involvement from maemo developers and grow our community.

I've been in the maemo community a long time, and I'm sorry if I still think that this place is meant for those of us that have been using maemo for the past 5-6 years and developing for it, these are the people we're addressing when we talk about MeeGo, the goals have always been clear.

Android was never said to have any kind of an open governance, you're completely at the whim of Google. As for hardware, got nothing to add to what has already been said :)

I think your post was one of the better constructively critical posts on the subject. And I appreciate the time you took to write it :)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

To what end? It's like trying to get Amiga developers to "help out" this wonderful new project called Windows back in the 80s. Sure, it may never actually run stably on the Amiga hardware, but that's not the goal! Wait, what is the goal? To suck away developers from the initial platform? I'm not sure I like that!

The goal you're touting (as I see is) is to pull people off of the platform I'm using, that's vibrant, active, and starting to really show off what it can do, and into another that has no real future for the current hardware. For what?

Especially given that it's not even guaranteed at this point that anyone is going to make a MeeGo-based device. There's been lots of talk, tons of announcements, but we're 6 months into 2011, and even Nokia looks like they may be back-tracking now. Not to mention a complete lack of any vendor talking about doing phone support, outside of maybe LG on one device. Nokia has been quite mum on weather it's only announced MeeGo offering will have any GSM capabilities.

I don't think I could get most people here to agree on what the color "blue" is, yet alone what the goals here have been over the past 5 years. To say they've "always been clear" is farcical. More so seeing as a good number on the forum are here because of the N900, which was less tablet and more of a cross-over device.

Yes, creating an open tablet platform has been a key part of this forum. I can see how MeeGo is a natural continuation of that in the minds of some people, especially the N700/800 crowd. I can even see the desire to get people excited about it and get them to jump the shark and start working on the next big thing. But you shouldn't do so using false pretenses, which is exactly what you're doing when touting MeeGo on N900, while saying you never intend to see it for casual users.

If the N900 is never going to run on MeeGo as primary OS, via a simple update/reflash procedure for common people, then it's wasted effort. Better to put the time and energy into something useful, like getting the Calendar to sync with on-line services, or Contacts to not crash the device randomly. (Those are active bugs too, but I'm too lazy to link them right now.) Pouring time and energy into a single device that's never going to be run by more than a handful of developers, used to make apps for... who again? Who's going to use the things they make? Not N900 owners, if the target is only getting developers on to it.

To the contrary, it has been said and proven to some degree. It is open in that as a developer you can take the core, add the bits and bobbles for your hardware, and toss it on just about anything. As long as you don't care about continued development, or have a few people to manage upstream code merges on occasion, it's just as open as MeeGo. How many device manufacturers have picked up Android? How many have picked up Maemo? Which is more open? Again, it's all mixed... none of it is totally open, and claims of one being "more open" than the other often are blurred by the perspective of the person making that judgment.

<SNARK>
Besides, ask any Android user and they'll tell you, it's all open-source! They can do whatever you want on their Android phone, no really. :p Until you ask them to plug in a USB stick, and serve data from it to a laptop, while acting as both a web server and an AP hotspot... Because no phone can do that... Until yours can. But then you're just "showing off" with your "geeky phone". Not that I've ever done that... :rolleyes:

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

How did you miss the point about open _governance_ ? I did mention it twice ..

I don't care about "end-users" the people that are here from buying the N900 thinking it was something it wasn't, that is not an aspect of the community I've particularly enjoyed having around here the past year. Talk to most developers here and they all pretty much say the same thing.

I sympathise for their problem, but I'm thinking about myself, what I want my N900 to do, not what other users want it to do, and not what Nokia want it to do.

Just to reiterate, I'm not talking about the openness of source-code for drivers or any other closed component, I'm talking about the fact we have clear transparency into what goes on in MeeGo (at least that's the idea). Which is much different to how Google operate Android.

What I want, and the main reason I've moved from Maemo to MeeGo as my target platform, is a maintained and more up-to-date GNU/Linux system for my N900. Users here are complaining about not having continued updates, the N900 is three years old, most people are thinking seriously about, if they haven't already, buying a new device. So what happens to the N900s then? I, on the other hand, want my devices to last longer, that support can only come from MeeGo. Point me to another project that has a better chance of maintaining a working and maintainable system for the N900 and N8x0 devices?

So our goals, are a set of goals designed to give the bare essential functionality you need to call a phone a phone, making phone calls, sending and receive text messages, web browsing. We have all the hardware enablers in place. From that base, you can do what _you_ want with your N900.

I couldn't care less about users that feel they have a right to demand developers develop for them. We all do this as a hobby.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

That's a reasonable criticism that i can appreciate. Thanks for your post.

That's definitely something i can sympathize with but i don't think it's a very realistic expectation that such an environment can be stable in a consumer device sector these days where tech gadgets are the new hot item Happy Meal toys for kids. The very success at attracting developers leads to apps which leads to consumers wanting apps on their shiny devices.

So i sit somewhere on the fence between user and developer interests and i guess that's why i'm a bit surprised at the vehemence of attitudes toward meego and its discussion here.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

K. One last post. And don't take that as "this is rhetorical and I don't want a reply". I would love to continue the discussion, but I'm getting the feeling that we're at a bit of an en-passe. So I don't really plan on replying more unless that changes, though I do plan on reading replies!

First, Flandry:

Bingo. You really can't do one without the other. Techie devices will never reach their potential because resources will be too thin (ala OpenMoko). On the other hand, making a popular device too tweekable also makes it quite breakable. I think there's a middle ground, and really the N900 has come very close to hitting it. It just erred a bit too far on the geek side.

As for the vehemence toward MeeGo, I'll touch on that near the end.

Please, tell me, when Nokia pulls the plug on MeeGo for real and pulls back in the NDAs and the associated source and funding, how will _governance_ help you continue to update said binary blobs any better than the ones shipped with Maemo 5? And with MeeGo continuing full steam ahead, updating for new and better platforms, adapting it's APIs to new and better hardware; how long will it be before those blobs go stale and become useless? One major revision? Maybe two? How soon will that be? Will MeeGo be as solid on the N900 as Maemo is now before that happens? Will we be in a better place, "frozen" in MeeGo 2.2 than we are now in Maemo 5 PR 1.3?

I get that... but how long do you think that window is going to be open if MeeGo really catches on? How long until it fragments, and closed bits start popping up, for Intel, for LG, for Nokia? How long before infighting happens between the governing groups? How long before trade secrets creep back in, and the community is put on the back burner? And then you're beholden again. The bigger the success, the faster it's going to explode.

I'm not saying governance isn't important. I'm saying it's potentially short-lived if you don't have access to the source under it. I've seen groups with lots of say into what went into version 1 and 2, only to be screwed when the company decided to go another way for versions 3 to 20, and took away those governance rights. Remember Linux on the PS3? Source + tools + access = power. Anything else is an illusion.

Without the source, you're still stuck with binary blobs. Blobs eventually go bad when the thing they belong to doesn't stop at the same time they do. MeeGo will have newer blobs, sure... But those blobs will be trying to keep up with a moving target. Tell me, would you rather have an old Win98 driver that works with a couple know issues, or a WinME driver that's 6 months newer that might fix one of the issues? Sometimes newer isn't better.

Have you not noticed there's still work going on here? There are new apps showing up in the repositories every day. There are still new kernels being developed and tweaked. New ideas and things happening. Yes, there are closed lumps, but many of them they're replaceable, or have a solid API that provides "essential functionality" needed to do the job it's set to do. Sometimes the lumps got in the way (BME vs h.e.n. being a key example), but for the most part, it's not that bad.

I have a device right in front of me that fits that description exactly. It's an OpenMoko FreeRunner. Their goal was to provide a bare-bones set of libraries to use the hardware, then hand it over to the community so they could "make it do what they wanted it to". You know where that went? In circles, really fast. It fragmented before it was released, honest. The internal team fragmented and started working on a new base AS the device was shipping. There are now 15 different distros for it, and none of them can't reliably pull off basic functions most people associate with feature phones, yet alone a smart phone. Hardware wise, the only delta between it and the N900 was a camera, a 3G chipset, and slightly faster CPU (A7 vs A8). Google it and check it out some time. Is that what you really want?

From the looks of the MeeGo bug list I'm looking at, all the hardware enablers aren't in place yet. Wifi is still flakey, accelerometers are still unhappy, and several other bits are still not right after months of trying. Yes, I'm happy to hear it's getting better more rapidly than a couple months ago. But again I ask, to what end?

What do you want it to do with your N900 that it can't do now with Maemo? Is re-inventing the wheel going to help that? What support do you expect to see when/if an actual supported platforms start coming into existence? You don't strike me as the type that want's "Angry Birds - Rio". And yet I don't really see anything in Maemo that's lacking that you'll be able to pull off with just a change of OS.

:confused: Wow... Way to lump everyone in. Your either for MeeGo, or a noob demanding things of developers? No middle ground possible? Way to get people interested in "joining your team".

And now we see the true colors... And why people are hostile toward MeeGo here.

I'm a developer and an end-user. I came in with a good understanding of what the gadget was. I was elated to have a device that was "80% done". I was able to hack it to do exactly what I wanted, and a few things I didn't even know I wanted it to do. Sure, I'd love to have had flash 10 support and a vector based GPS system with turn-by turn out of the box. But what's available now, and what we've created together here, is actually quite nice.

I too expect to have my N900 for a long time, probably at least another 3 to 4 years. I see it running Maemo for most of that time right now. I had my N6230 for 5 year before this one, and I still have tablets at home running Windows 98, chugging along happily. Far from being a "dead-end" platform, I see support for Maemo/N900 it all over the place. No, it's not from Nokia, but then I didn't expect a lot from Nokia. I was actually note expecting 1.3 at all, I figured we were done at 1.2.

The community of people (users and developers) we have here though is beyond what I'd hoped for, and something I want to protect. From my perspective, based on what you're saying above, you're looking to pilfer that community with the promise of a half-baked cookie that may some day be almost as good as what we have now. That's why some people here are so "hostile" toward MeeGo. They've seen this before, and watched it tear apart communities, leaving nobody a winner. I for one don't want that here, which is why I pose these questions, and why I'm reserved about how much people are advocating for it.


Anyway. I'm betting at this point we're not going to see eye to eye on this. You've made your goals pretty clear, and I applaud your directness in doing so. We both have a different view on what's important, and how long either platform has a chance on living on the N900.

And yes, again, I think it's great to have updates on MeeGo posting back into this community. Who knows, if your vision comes to fruition, maybe most of the community here will transition and move to MeeGo, with continued support and happy new widgets and what not. Of course in your opinion, that could be a bad thing, what with all the people showing up and demanding things, no?

Either way, I wish you luck in getting your community up and running, as well as getting the N900 stable under the new OS. My only hope is that your community doesn't come at the expense of this one, at least not any more than it already has.

Good luck!

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Meego is entirely open, the entire source of the core OS is open (and I believe free). Hardware drivers are irrelevant, you don't hear people claiming linux is "not open" because it allows closed source drivers to exist and the same is true of meego.

A lack of understanding about what open/free means in terms of the OS is one of the many reasons people spread misinformation.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Based on the recent comments by the OP, I have to vote "no". Prior to these comments, I would have either voted "yes" or been indifferent.

While MeeGo has some roots in Maemo, the only real connection is a single piece of hardware that is capable of running multiple OS's. MeeGo information is only a quick google search away, and with a couple of bookmarks, a person could readily stay on top of it.

If the prevailing attitude is "MeeGo by developers for developers, common folk need not apply", then I'd prefer to not see information about it here. This type of attitude is why I chose not to participate in bug tracking.

IMHO, some of the best programs for the N900 were written by developers who actively engaged and encouraged feedback from the non-developers in the community. The interaction in threads about those programs contributed to quick development into a robust product that was easy to use.

If you'd prefer to limit the exposure of MeeGo DE (perhaps it should be DOE, developer only edition, as opposed to CE, community? edition) to mostly developers, you'd probably be better off if you didn't post information here where non-developers have easy access.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Since there is a forum for

maemo.org > Talk > OS / Platform > MeeGo / Harmattan

Answer has to be Yes. Simples.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

No, the original question was not that. Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users. This is not about patch xyz being applied to trunk. This is about info that might be interesting for Maemo users (new flashable image/release available, major functionality changes, application cross-pollination, etc).

Very true. MeeGo has a *lot* (LOT) to learn what user feedback means and can do for a platform (there is a lot of 'I know, I know' and ivory towers going on, partially because of the focus of the meego.com project, partically because of the lack of devices).

I think the term "developer" is heavily misused here (one of the reasons for the terminology change, I believe). It's just that people have to realize that guys there are not Nokia care, empathic-voiced call center personnel, but (mainly software) engineers and geeks. I also think this applies the other way round, engineers having to realize that not everybody wandering in there* necessarily deals professionally with software. That IS the open source model.


*Again, this is partially caused by having no MeeGo devices around and hence people not understanding where/what they are looking for. It's like going into a car manufacturing plant because you would like an engine overhaul.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I'd like to join woody14619's statements.

Of course I like to be informed about the progress of Meego. I personally feel spammed with things as the Cordia banner (It doesn't make me sleepless at night!). But given, that nobody here has a working Meego with a working Cordia running it's kind of strange.
This just as a small sidenote. tswindell and woody14619 said it all.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I join in most of woody14619's comments as well. Particularly, I am not totally convinced of the open governance of MeeGo, and this is why I choose to continue to promote Maemo.

Cordia, which uses the Hildon desktop - basically the Maemo UI, is working. If Nokia would let us, we would call itMaemo. The project is off topic here, go to

http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=56822
http://wiki.maemo.org/Cordia

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

An open governance, more open than any other is better than the alternatives. I think I got a bit moody yesterday due to it being very late. Everything I say here is my opinion, I'm not affiliated with Nokia, Intel or any sub-contractor. All my Maemo and MeeGo work has been in my spare time, because I love working in this area of technology.

I would love MeeGo on the N900, whether through Cordia, or MeeGo N900 Community Edition, to be end-user acceptable, and even though I don't think this is our primary goal for the project, it is certainly a possibility. I'm pretty sure by the end of this year MeeGo on the N900 will be something very functional and useful for most N900 users. That is, if we keep going in the direction at the pace we're going at.

I'm promoting MeeGo both here and in general, not to poach developers from Maemo, okay, a few of us have pretty much left Maemo development for MeeGo, me included. I'm trying to get them to have a look at what's going on, maybe try and port some of their Maemo Qt apps to MeeGo, and generally see how well things are working. Especially wrt to Qt & QtMobility, these things actually benefit both communities.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Actually, you're quite wrong on this, on multiple accounts.

The entire Fedora project is based around complete open source. They do in fact call Ubuntu and several other platforms "not open" because they include close-sourced programs and drivers. In order to use Fedora with closed source tools, one must manually add a separate third-party repository to get such items (like flash player, acrobat, and hardware drivers for high-res on some graphics cards).

Calling hardware drivers "irrelevant" seems odd to me. An OS, at it's core, is a base of scheduling systems, resource management APIs, and drivers. At least 30% of any given kernel is drivers, since you need those to do anything with the outside world. Look at most of the bugs in MeeGo and Maemo. Most of them are drivers not handling hardware properly.

I'm not "demanding" a completely open system, though that would be something I'd love to see. All I'm saying is, calling one OS better than the other when they have the same limitations in regard to binary-blob drivers, is silly. Especially when one is still in development with lots of new bugs, while the other has been in the field for three years and is working decently in the real world (albeit with lots of old bugs).

That I think we can agree on. But governance itself is not a substitute for actual code. Compared to iOS, or Android, or even what's left of the council here, MeeGo does win in that regard. I'm just noting that it should be treated as what it is: temporary.

There are very few people here that do this type of work as their main job. I'm blessed in that I get paid to do something I like (very close to this, but not phone/tablet related), though it does tend to limit how much I can contribute to community projects, both for time and logistical reasons.

I agree to a limited regard. Getting people to cross-compile or develop for both targets is a great thing. I'd love to see apps from here move rather seamlessly to MeeGo if it takes off.

I'm just asking that things be talked about realistically, based on where things are, not on where we want or expect things to be in three months. Doing otherwise can cause people to lose interest in both platforms, which helps no one.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Why do you think it's temporary? Especially now that the community office is taking on contributors outside of Nokia and Intel and we're hoping to have the same in the Technical Steering Group.

Well, realistically, the current state is that our adaptation is pretty good, accelerometer does actually work, contrary to what you mentioned earlier. It really can be used as a day-to-day device, like I said earlier I do. What I miss, and what stops me moving completely to MeeGo for my work phone as well as my personal phone, is actually the lack of a couple of apps I really like on Maemo (Conboy is probably the primary).

So the main thing is we need some apps porting, if I had the time I'd do it myself, what I'm really after is for a few devs to port their apps and I'll be willing to help them do it. Outside of apps, we're working on making the performance better and soon we'll have a nice new shiny browser, though Opera works really well.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Well, if you want to bash Ubuntu because of those things, the proper base of comparison is Debian, compared to it, even Fedora seems to have a lax morale. :p

Care to substantiate that with some numbers ?

...and just for the sake of purism :) Maemo and MeeGo are both the same OS, just different distros.

I find that remark peculiar (from the Maemo/Council angle) as MeeGo governance is entirely corporate-run, *including* community matters/applications. Maemo is/was a lot more open at least in that regard.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Because it always is. Governance, by it's very definition, is something granted temporarily by a power the controls a resource, usually when they don't want to be bothered with running or managing that resource themselves. If said resource becomes something profitable and tangible, or takes off even to half the extent Android has, "community governance" will be revoked rather quickly in favor of profits and industry. The power comes from the source, not from the method of managing it. Historically I've found that the development community will be the first hit by this, in part because corporate folks have an innate distrust of educated workers, especially those not asking for compensation. (Though that may be less true on your side of the pond...)

Please stop that. Stop trying to make this about me, and implying that I'm in some way wrong. I didn't "mention" something earlier. I noted from an authoritative source (and included a link to said source, MeeGo's own bugtack list) that there is still an open issue with the accelerometer (and Wifi, and sms notification).

You're acting as if I'm just pulling stuff from my posterior, which is not the case. I'm using information presented by the MeeGo community, in the MeeGo bug tracking list, which seems rather up to date. If they say they have a bug, in a re-opened state, with a developer showing activity on it in the past two days, I'm going to take that as an indicator that there's still an issue there.

I'm glad to hear it's progressing. And I do hope some authors are willing to put the time in to move tools to MeeGo. Perhaps a good start would be offering a link to a page about where developers can go to get info on setting up a development environment? I'm sure there's a nice wiki page on the MeeGo site that has such a list.

You misinterpret me. If I explained the Hasidic law meant that those following that faith didn't think it right to mix meat and dairy, would you call me antisemitic? Why then when I explain that others think open implies complete openness, I'm some how bashing a distro?

I'm not bashing Ubuntu at all, nor endorsing one belief over another. I was simply pointing out to ScottishDuck that his definition of "open/free software" is not as universal as he seems to imply it is. There are many groups (like Fedora/Debian) that believe including anything that's not open is in fact not to be considered opensource. Defining that as "misinformation" is incorrect.

I find irony in the fact that you defend the use of the term "open source" on a distro that contains closed source, but then go on to argue pedantically that:


Technically,yes. The same could be said of Android, could it not? Since it uses the same OS, a Linux based kernel with a few custom drivers? Yes, in a puristic sense, they're all distros. From a laymans perspective, they're different. Just as to a layman Ubuntu is "open source" because most of it is open.

I'd love to, but I lack the will to bother. I'm pretty sure I'm right on that one though. Just go check out the MeeGo bug tracker yourself. Many of the bugs still open revolve around hardware drivers. I linked several in a post a few back.

Again, I'm not claiming one distro is better than another, or that one model of governance is superior. I was simply pointing out that governance is less important, because the terms can be changed on the whim of the group that controls the resource. Since both models in this case have nearly identical bits of closed source in terms of hardware drivers, I see little reason to elevate one above the other based on that. If you have an issue with someone claiming one is more open than the other, please direct your comments to them, not to me. :D

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Hmm, strange... Have you tried it? Last time I tested it could not get the X up at all... And as I understood, the packages are just built and nobody is testing them as the developers don't have a N900 to test it... :D

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Can you share a source for definition ? I understood governance simply to be the process of governing, might be based on owhenship, license, blood, whatever. AFAIK There is nothing *implied* about it's temporal character. Now, the resource control is a tricky business in software, esp. most open licenses like GPL, because while copyrights will allow you to change licenses and governance models, you cannot change them reatroactively. In plain English, if you go back to closed, if your project was actually truly being worked on/contributed to, you just created a fork (coincidentally, this is the danger Android faces ATM). Qt is actually an interesting example as one of the changes was that authors do NOT need to transfer copyrights (thereby insuring that Nokia or whoever cannot 'steal' their code and backpedal into the haze of proprietary development with it).

Yeah, them smileys, they don't make them as they used to :)

Nope, that's actually pretty wrong, from a purist standpoint both Maemo and MeeGo are GNU/Linux, while Android is just Linux (no glibc et al). Now, a kernel does *not* an OS make }:)

I would assert that due to the UX-es being developed behind closed doors and app/framework bugs (say, Qt) often filed in upstream bugtrackers it's perfectly natural that you see a lot of low level bugs in the MeeGo bugtracker. Add to this the effect that currently the people working on it are not end-users but people who work with the low level stuff... I wasn't lazy and checked - Maemo Core has 285 bugs filed against it, while just browser+email+IM has over 1700 bugs filed against them (and Maemo userspace has a lot more stuff than just those three applications).


Oh yes you did ! :P

That is quite a bit stretching it. In that context open source itself is not important (because it became or can stop being open source on somebody's whim).