On 04/05/2014 08:12 AM, Carsten Munk wrote: > On 04/04/14 19:39, Filip Kłębczyk wrote: >> W dniu 04.04.2014 18:00, Carsten Munk pisze: >>> Hi, >>> >>> There has been a lot of discussion surrounding SailfishOS, the open >>> source parts of it (incl. middleware within Mer and Nemo Mobile >>> project) >>> and collaboration methods/practices -- and that we can do better than >>> how things are today. >> >> Hi, >> >> Your mail is direct reaction to this widely retweeted tweet today: >> >> https://twitter.com/fk_lx/status/452037379038408704 >> >> and previous discussion that was conducted on Twitter. It's worth to >> notice problem was published long time ago at Together, before it became >> hot: >> >> https://together.jolla.com/question/680/co-creation-leading-to-co-development/#post-id-1214 >> >> >> https://together.jolla.com/question/680/co-creation-leading-to-co-development/#post-id-6833 >> >> >> >> Since that time, no significant actions have been taken to fix that, but >> that can be understood and justified considering other important things >> for Jolla like preparing to MWC and Sailfish going out of beta. >> > > It's safe to say that we've been in a crazy race to conditionally > deliver features, fixes and ensuring our existence. > > We would probably have had more time if we didn't switch SoC and do a > Qt4->Qt5 + X11/Wayland transition; it's been too busy and we've lagged > behind in doing proper open development with roadmapping ('Do > everything needed to deliver a working product' isn't a good roadmap > item), explaining our actions, transparency around our open source > components. It's a good time to something about it now. > > The discussions you link to have been a big source of inspiration to > do something about this topic, as there has been many valid points in > them. > >> We would really like to have constructive talk with the decisive people >> around Sailfish, that have real influence and can change how open source >> collaboration looks in practice (whoever those people are). > > We also want >> for Jolla engineers who work on open source parts take part in that >> discussion, as it's a topic that is directly connected with their work. > > I will do my best to make sure that the right people will be there - a > meeting where nobody can take actions or act on the meeting results > isn't a good one. > >> I only have doubts that if it will be normal, uncontrolled IRC >> discussion, that it might result in chaos (like many of those that were >> made on this topic on IRC before). > >> I wanted to give my own proposal how >> such discussion should look like from organizational point of view, so >> there would be a chance for it's results to be satisfying for both sides >> (Jolla & OSS community). > > > > I agree, we still have time to set up an agenda - first thing you need > to do is set a date in advance to make sure people will show up, then > a proper agenda. > > I've opened an etherpad at http://piratepad.net/SailfishOSSMeeting - > please add topics for discussion. > > Agenda is intentionally left blank as to make sure proper agenda items > are brought up. > > A background thing for this meeting is that (this is with my Mer and > Nemo middleware hat on), there is an idea and/or intention is to merge > the Mer and Nemo middleware repositories and infrastructure > (bugtracker, git repositories, OBS repositories) together under the > Mer project. > > There has been a long unnatural split between Mer and Nemo middleware > and a bit unclear one sometimes; causing also a semi-fork of Mer > packages (Qt5) as Mer couldn't move fast enough. In the end, what most > want from Mer is a solid mobile core and hence ended up using a > combination of Mer and Nemo middleware anyway. > > In that regard, there is a good opportunity to establish new practices > and patterns of collaboration, hence why this meeting is a good thing > to start with. > > In the ideal future world from my point of view, if you'd like to > contribute to SailfishOS open source middleware; you'd be contributing > to Mer. Currently it is too confusing to contribute to - too much > split information, different practices, different bugtrackers, even > differing packaging practices, etc.
Reading this I can't help but wonder if Jolla now claims ownership of Mer/Nemo then. Even with fancy hat changing. Bringing this discussion up in a strictly Sailfish context implies this. There are other downstream projects relying on Mer and I'd expect this to be discussed with them, in a completely "vendor neutral" setting. Mer used to be big about this, before it got dragged into a "ship a product" race of one of the involved parties. >> I haven't had time to made it yet, because I >> had quite busy day, but I hope the fact that Carsten already took first >> step and proposed a meeting does still give me a chance for doing that. >> I think it's really important for the discussion to have proper and calm >> form and I think it's possible considering goodwill on both sides. > > Yes, I think we can do this. > >> >> Regards, >> Filip >> >> PS. Personally I really count that Marc Dillon (Head of Software >> Development in Jolla) will take part in it. > > BR > Carsten Munk Just my 0,02€ Thomas _______________________________________________ SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
