luca | # 41 | 2010-08-13, 13:39 | Report

The problem is that closed source code isn't actively maintained when it no longer makes commercial sense to do so (read: n8x0 roughly a year/a year and a half ago and now n900)

Call me when there's, e.g., an updated flash version for my n800 that fixes its outstanding security issues.

Oh, sure it's much better not to open it at all and giving us nice speeches about openness instead.

Mmh, let me check:

No, it doesn't.

luca | # 42 | 2010-08-13, 19:07 | Report

I want to make clear that this last remark is not directed at the community ssu team: they did a wonderful job, even more so considering the limitations they had to work with.

qgil | # 43 | 2010-08-13, 20:02 | Report

Guys, I understand your argumentation since the first time it was explained. No need to revolve further, really.

I have also explained the current openness strategy of the MeeGo Devices team, focused on MeeGo. You have also understood it and I won't insist on it.

The openness priorities of MeeGo Devices don't mach with the openness expectations of those interested in Maemo here and now. We are aware of this and we had this discussion held internally once during the last half, when analysing the situation after the MeeGo launch. Based on this discussion I will explain the current situation to the people responsible of the business decisions of opening Nokia software.

If there is a change in the approach for opening current Maemo components, then let's talk about the community's work to request and handle the software opened.

danramos | # 44 | 2010-08-13, 20:42 | Report

Maybe it's just me, or maybe I still need some coffee today or something but I read, and re-read, what you said and it still keeps disappearing in a puff of smoke for me as a lot of words with a zero-sum difference at the end.

Speak layman's terms to me and summarize, what do you mean?

Matan | # 45 | 2010-08-13, 20:54 | Report

Yet again:
I wish that the new rules include MeeGo as a forbidden word in the Maemo section of this forum.

Texrat | # 46 | 2010-08-13, 20:58 | Report

My interpretation: Quim will revisit this subject again with Nokia movers and shakers, and if there's a change in approach/policy to our favor, he will inform the community and we can then discuss how best to proceed.

danramos | # 47 | 2010-08-13, 21:28 | Report

So.... status quo. Well, on the up side, at least he's doing it again. And again. And again.

Texrat | # 48 | 2010-08-13, 21:31 | Report

You know the drill well!

danramos | # 49 | 2010-08-13, 21:40 | Report

Years of observation and practice.

shadowjk | # 50 | 2010-08-15, 09:01 | Report

As for battery charging on the N900, the hardware components involved have full datasheets availabe. I can monitor the charge level, and charge the battery without using the closed bme. It took me about two weekends to write that in busybox sh script plus a helper binary from i2c-tools for the actual hw access. Obviously a shell script in two x-terminals that requires user intervention to start charging is nowhere user ready, but I don't have the spare time to rewrite it into anything proper..

The components involved are bq24150, bq27200, and the usb parts.