[MeeGo-dev] Refocusing meego-dev
Foster, Dawn M
dawn.m.foster at intel.com
Fri Aug 20 14:47:38 PDT 2010
On Aug 20, 2010, at 12:16 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 21:46 +0100, Andrew Flegg wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 21:36, Attila Csipa <meego at csipa.in.rs> wrote:
>>> I'm thinking that maybe the naming of the lists has something to do with it. I
>>> did a quick poll among colleagues and (while not obviously the most scientific
>>> method) discovered that without additional information, they too would have
>>> posted application issues in meego-dev and platform/sdk related issues in
>> Indeed, I've asked a developer here and they answered similarly.
>> "meego-sys-dev" and "meego-app-dev" if long names are a problem?
>> Because, conceivably we may want "meego-sdk-dev" (or similar) to
>> discuss the development of the SDK, rather than the use of it (SDK
>> development, across multiple platforms, being a notably hoary
> +1 from me on "meego-sys-dev", "meego-app-dev", "meego-sdk-dev". But
> these are just name changes, the definition of the lists wouldn't
I actually like the idea of renaming meego-dev to meego-sys-dev and meego-sdk to meego-app-dev (we can probably do sdk dev conversations along with app dev conversations).
However, I've never tried to rename a mailing list. We'd probably need to set up some forwards, and I'm curious if there are any other technical gotchas in renaming a mailing list?
> So let's be more specific and use the Buteo thread as example. Is that
> something for "meego-dev" (regardless whether it gets renamed to
> The part about choosing MeeGo is clearly off-topic. But Buteo is part of
> the MeeGo distribution, "the code that goes into the MeeGo distribution
> download as the MeeGo open source project". Therefore discussing its
> design and implementation here is on-topic. But there's a slippery slope
> between "Buteo design" (on-topic) and "feature proposals" (off-topic,
> How to use Buteo in a GUI is also a grey area. We are working on a GUI
> for it which will ship with the MeeGo distribution, so my questions
> about how to use service profiles in such a GUI are on-topic. A
> developer who wants to use Buteo in an application however would have to
> ask the same questions on "meego-sdk/meego-app-dev".
> I personally find that separation unfortunate because a) it is confusing
> and b) demotivating for non-core developers who (after all) might one
> day contribute patches to the core software. But I don't have a better
> proposal which satisfies the goals of keeping traffic low enough on
> meego-dev for it to be useful and avoids fragmentation of the core
> Dawn, does this interpretation match your understanding of the lists?
This sounds about right, and as you pointed out, there are certainly a lot of grey areas where certain topics, like Buteo, overlap. In general, architectural decisions are probably best suited to meego-dev and implementation within an application is probably meego-sdk (or meego-app-dev).
More information about the MeeGo-dev