Life after Opie 1.2.0

Hi fellow developers,

now that through Familiar Linux 0.8.2 and OpenZaurus 3.5.3,
Opie 1.2.0 is finally released to the general audience, we
can start the great Palaver about what we want to do next.

>From discussions on IRC in the past weeks, I have got the
impression that basically there are three kind of interests
out there:

a) fixing bugs and polishing what we currently have

b) adding new applications and playing with new concepts
   based on the current set of libraries

c) starting from scratch with something revolutionary rather
   than cloning existing environments

Abstained from the road I personally would like to pursuit, now
a few statements about how we should organize either way:

a) Bug fixes and polishing should be done in CVS HEAD -
when there is a critical mass of fixes reached, the tree
could be tagged as 1.2.x and be prepared for another release.

b) New applications and playing with new concepts can also be done
in CVS HEAD, although to prevent destabilizing the codebase,
for larger and substantial changes I recommend adding new directories
instead of using a CVS branch. For instance, I've heard _alwin_ wants
to look into a whole new Launcher based on Qt/E 2.x - this should be
(Continue reading)

Lorn Potter | 13 Apr 21:59

Re: Life after Opie 1.2.0

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 11:45 pm, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
> Hi fellow developers,
>
> now that through Familiar Linux 0.8.2 and OpenZaurus 3.5.3,
> Opie 1.2.0 is finally released to the general audience, we
> can start the great Palaver about what we want to do next.
>
> >From discussions on IRC in the past weeks, I have got the
>
> impression that basically there are three kind of interests
> out there:
>
> a) fixing bugs and polishing what we currently have
>
> b) adding new applications and playing with new concepts
>    based on the current set of libraries
>
> c) starting from scratch with something revolutionary rather
>    than cloning existing environments

 d) merging qtopia 2.1.x changes, and getting back to a compatible 
drop-in/stand-in/addition-to for qtopia and qtopia devices. Merging Qtopia 4 
changes when they are released, saving us (opie developers) a lot of 
headaches in the meantime.

Why you ask? Because we do not have the developer resources to start from 
scratch. Why not harness Trolltech's developers to maintain those base 
libraries, etc? Opie can then be an extension of that. How about porting to 
qt/e4? Do you want to do that entirely yourself? It isn't going to be easy. I 
see first hand the struggles of porting Qtopia to qte/4. The changes are 
(Continue reading)

Re: Life after Opie 1.2.0

Am Donnerstag, den 14.04.2005, 05:59 +1000 schrieb Lorn Potter:
> > >From discussions on IRC in the past weeks, I have got the
> >
> > impression that basically there are three kind of interests
> > out there:
> >
> > a) fixing bugs and polishing what we currently have
> >
> > b) adding new applications and playing with new concepts
> >    based on the current set of libraries
> >
> > c) starting from scratch with something revolutionary rather
> >    than cloning existing environments
> 
>  d) merging qtopia 2.1.x changes, and getting back to a compatible 
> drop-in/stand-in/addition-to for qtopia and qtopia devices. Merging Qtopia 4 
> changes when they are released, saving us (opie developers) a lot of 
> headaches in the meantime.

Right, this justifies as option #4 to be considered.

--

-- 
Regards,

Mickey.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dipl.-Inf. Michael 'Mickey' Lauer <mickey <at> tm.cs.uni-frankfurt.de>
------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Dan Williams | 14 Apr 00:17

Re: Life after Opie 1.2.0

On Wednesday 13 April 2005 14:59, Lorn Potter wrote:
[snip]
>  d) merging qtopia 2.1.x changes, and getting back to a compatible
> drop-in/stand-in/addition-to for qtopia and qtopia devices. Merging Qtopia
> 4 changes when they are released, saving us (opie developers) a lot of
> headaches in the meantime.
>
> Why you ask? Because we do not have the developer resources to start from
> scratch. Why not harness Trolltech's developers to maintain those base
> libraries, etc? Opie can then be an extension of that. How about porting to
> qt/e4? Do you want to do that entirely yourself? It isn't going to be easy.
> I see first hand the struggles of porting Qtopia to qte/4. The changes are
> numerable and it can be frustrating.

This is a valid option to me.

You have a very good point about the Opie project having enough resources to 
start from scratch.  However, I do not believe we have been/will be creating 
our own functionality and core libraries simply for the sake of 'Opie is not 
Qtopia'.  Everything we have done to date has been for a specific technical 
reason or for a feature we have felt is needed, but not part of Qtopia.

I know that TrollTech has its own goals and requirements (based on client 
needs) for the environment, and to me it does not matter one bit that those 
goals are commercial.  Opie has its own goals as well, and I think we 
developers need to decide if our goals overlap with TrollTech's or not.  It 
is not a personal matter of one being right and the other wrong, just if the 
2 groups are moving in the same direction or not.

Also in regards to porting Opie to qte/4, even if we decide to utilize qte/4 
(Continue reading)

Fels Oliver | 14 Apr 08:56

Re: Life after Opie 1.2.0

> Why you ask? Because we do not have the developer resources 
> to start from 
> scratch. Why not harness Trolltech's developers to maintain 
> those base libraries, etc? Opie can then be an extension of that. How 
> about porting to qt/e4? Do you want to do that entirely yourself? It
isn't 
> going to be easy. I see first hand the struggles of porting Qtopia to
qte/4. The 
> changes are numerable and it can be frustrating.

Well, at least we have started the plain old discussion from scratch :-)
I think I am getting some chips and a beer, putting my feet up and watch
the show. :-)

Oliver
_______________________________________________

http://opie.handhelds.org/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/DeveloperWikiIndex

Opie-devel mailing list
Opie-devel <at> handhelds.org
https://handhelds.org/mailman/listinfo/opie-devel

Andreas Richter | 14 Apr 21:34

Re: Life after Opie 1.2.0


Am Mittwoch, 13. April 2005 15:45 schrieb Michael 'Mickey' Lauer:
> Hi fellow developers,

Hi all,

here are my 2 cents...

> a) fixing bugs and polishing what we currently have

Thats the simplest way :) and the most likely one (imho).

> c) starting from scratch with something revolutionary rather
>    than cloning existing environments

That's my favorite. And yes i know that's too many work for a hand full 
developers, we are at the moment. But we have a real chance to make Opie 
attractive for the user and for 3rd party developers. And projects like KDE 
have also started with a handfull of developers. It cost time, sweat and 
nerves to bring Opie 1.2 from scratch to a usable state.

One plus i see is:
When we can release opie-libs under LGPL other developers or companies can 
provide their software on top of Opie. And that is then a real competition to 
Qtopia. And i know that TT don't like it even if we have a big big work for 
us but we also have all chances to make a better software than Qtopia are. 
Remember i don't think Qtopia is really bad software but we have had problems 
with it in the past. So we have now the chance to split from Qtopia and try 
out to make it better.

(Continue reading)

Lorn Potter | 14 Apr 22:58

Re: Life after Opie 1.2.0

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 05:34 am, Andreas Richter wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 13. April 2005 15:45 schrieb Michael 'Mickey' Lauer:
> > Hi fellow developers,
>
> Hi all,
>
> here are my 2 cents...
>
> > a) fixing bugs and polishing what we currently have
>
> Thats the simplest way :) and the most likely one (imho).
>
> > c) starting from scratch with something revolutionary rather
> >    than cloning existing environments
>
> That's my favorite. And yes i know that's too many work for a hand full
> developers, we are at the moment. But we have a real chance to make Opie
> attractive for the user and for 3rd party developers. And projects like KDE
> have also started with a handfull of developers. It cost time, sweat and
> nerves to bring Opie 1.2 from scratch to a usable state.
too much time and not enough developers. Really. Who's going to do all 
this work?

> One plus i see is:
> When we can release opie-libs under LGPL other developers or companies can

I personally don't like the LGPL from the standpoint of free software, 
and I don't recommend free software using it. The LGPL is not about free 
software, it's about letting companies take your work that you provided 
for free without having to give back to the community. RMS even says do 
(Continue reading)


Gmane