From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com ([209.85.212.177]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SoWNW-0006OH-S3 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:05:06 +0200 Received: by wibhm11 with SMTP id hm11so3350178wib.6 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:53:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=S/neZmNzORDff3ME1p2eFQI9CUsPAnVrO2Rjq+frw38=; b=s75zVfLzEgmfbv+HxFM0pmIxFmlnHP94q/qLBovHk8Ay3VFUp/pqVtLwGKJVBAmuK/ 1q0zwO/bgOHIpX3BwPoaZKqJwDDrD3cPURHVxcn6xRN2icejwuSk2J+BD6jaf5Eg95M5 s4NVoRIwtQ7uaHxiytoLeIcF/Km0/V/hLYgWuUa8jEiQFCWOoQvTDfIHwUJQrc2EyY5+ EcOsg1YXesIPd26/I968RgDzSvXdG3NMask4CRLTiTt1a0yjyZVTN5xNzOodmHs3gp8a /0v8OrzsXE1ZpNIH6+Rhf8kUN/BHFGN03yLCWy4+nFe12xebXFC0gJ1le4L0DurH7PgX 7KGg== Received: by 10.216.215.201 with SMTP id e51mr17465284wep.214.1341910436507; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:53:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([94.230.152.246]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id eu4sm27871246wib.2.2012.07.10.01.53.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:53:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 10:53:52 +0200 From: Martin Jansa To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Message-ID: <20120710085352.GL6308@jama.jama.net> References: <1341909998.23941.20.camel@ted> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1341909998.23941.20.camel@ted> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: The Mythical Sato Replacement X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:05:06 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 25046 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PpocKf6TCvdC9BKE" Content-Disposition: inline --PpocKf6TCvdC9BKE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 09:46:38AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 15:36 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Burton, Ross wr= ote: > > > > > > Shuku will be a descendent of Sato, that is continue to use the > > > Matchbox Window Manager, Desktop, and Panel; although the latter two > > > will be updated for GTK+ 3. All applications will be removed and > > > fully reconsidered when adding back, so the text editor might well > > > change from leafpad to something that had a release in two years, > > > Midori is looking like a good web browser choice instead of Web, the > > > PIM suite removed, and so on. > >=20 > > Did you consider QT instead of GTK+ ? I think having wayland would be c= ool. >=20 > Ross didn't cover the question "Why do we need anything in OE-Core at > all?". The answer is that we do need *something* to actually test the > components we build. Its all well and good having toolchains, libraries, > architecture support, graphics, X11 etc. but if we can't tell whether it > works or not we're in a bad way. I've said this before but I want to > make it really clear that I believe in testing what we ship, otherwise > its worthless. But then it still can be in extra layer (maybe in oe-core repo), no? Basic tests with oe-core only and then test graphics/X11 with oe-core+meta-foo layer. Where meta-foo can be sato/qt/kde/enlightenment/.. and maintained/released together with oe-core. Cheers, > As I see it, there are some significant advantages of matchbox: >=20 > a) It doesn't put us in any one UI camp. I don't want OE-Core to be seen > as Qt only, or GNOME only, or enlightenment only. I know matchbox uses > GNOME components but its sufficiently different that it illustrates a > key value of what the OE architecture offers, the ability to customise > and innovate. As such I think it makes a compelling reference UI. >=20 > b) Its simple. There is no large complex stack to build and include. >=20 > c) Ownership wise, we can choose which direction to take some of the > matchbox/sato components in, not least as Ross authored matchbox-desktop > and matchbox-panel version 2. >=20 > We also need to be mindful of resources and expertise which is something > people perhaps don't immediately realise. Whist I've been able to find > the Yocto Project resources to cover the work on the core and much of > the feature development work we want to undertake, I've struggled to > convince people to put development resources into replacing Sato as its > hard to make a business case for or give a specific target for the UI. > As such, any plan which involves significant development effort is not > going to be resource feasible. A nice feature of Ross' plan is that it > can be done incrementally to a degree, it doesn't involve large amounts > of development effort and we have expertise directly on the team for > most of the work needed. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Richard >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --PpocKf6TCvdC9BKE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk/77aAACgkQN1Ujt2V2gBypaQCeOemot4mX5WDK8Fymzj6jablp r2EAn1wJv5rZT7tH4+XMP3ysTIsWjpmq =EW0S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PpocKf6TCvdC9BKE--