So Nokia has dramatically reduced commitment to MeeGo and has cited,
amongst other thinks, MeeGo's inability to deliver a focussed baseline
with sufficient speed. I happen to agree with this failure (and given
Nokia was a significant part of MeeGo's management I don't think
there's a blame issue - more a how do we fix it issue)
Assumptions and observations:
- MeeGo is intended to provide a viable but focussed baseline upon
which vendors can build compliant products; not to be an expansive
and 'complete' linux distribution.
- MeeGo has limited dedicated resourcs and focusing them on a
reduced MeeGo core will improve quality.
- MeeGo's main customers are not end-users - they are device
vendors : they should be the focus of our core engineering team's
design, delivery and QA effort.
- MeeGo core does not appreciate the difficulties a vendor has in
tracking MeeGo;
- A visibly secure development model is important to the perceived
integrity of MeeGo - so visibly restricting write access to the
core is important.
Proposal:
- MeeGo Core is confirmed as not being a linux distribution
- An open MeeGo project (openMeeGo?) is created on the community
infrastructure to provide a reference MeeGo distribution
- Packages not *essential* to the delivery of a compliant MeeGo
Core are moved into the community OBS (emacs, vi etc - maybe even
the reference UXes) where they are available for use by
development teams and end users.
- "openMeeGo" acts as a reference vendor and provides a forum for
reviewing and improving the processes MeeGo uses to communicate
releases
- MeeGo community (which includes core developers) has a
significantly lower barrier to entry.
Posts
