[Meego-architecture] Maliit and MeeGo Core Compliance

[Arjan van de Ven]

On 7/12/2011 6:58 AM, Michael Hasselmann wrote:
> [M]    http://maliit.org
> [ARCH] http://maliit.org/doc/framework/architecture.html
>
> * We would also want to require that the Maliit framework is the input
> method solution that's actually used, not just shipped.
>

that's what compliance means... just having the bits on spinning rust / 
electrons in a well does not suffice; you can't put something "next" to 
a core component and only use yours.
(this is for example why geoclue is not part of compliance; we 
explicitly want to allow people to put something next to it, given the 
current state of geoclue)


I assume this request is for the 1.3 timeframe ?