[MeeGo-dev] Meego spec - for comment
dneary at maemo.org
Tue Sep 14 00:26:23 PDT 2010
Warren Baird wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Quim Gil <quim.gil at nokia.com> wrote:
>> For clarity, I would restrict the word "compliance" to the official
>> MeeGo compliance based on the official API. "A MeeGo compliant app runs
>> on any MeeGo compliant device". If we dilute this we are opening a
>> Pandora's box.
>> The MeeGo Extras stable repository would contain apps tested to work on
>> top of official MeeGo releases. No "compliance" word needed: they are
> Hmm. That does solve the problem --- but it seems to me that having
> Extras - which might well be the vast majority of MeeGo apps, at least
> initially - not have some kind of official 'stamp' is a weakness, at
> least on the PR side...
> App developers might well view it as a slight that their apps aren't
> compliant, and users might well be less inclined to run apps that
> aren't officially compliant...
I agree - MeeGo Extras should be a repository of compliant applications.
And a compliant application, in this context, should be an application
which uses only MeeGo core APIs or MeeGo compliant libraries distributed
And a MeeGo compliant library is a library which uses only MeeGo core
APIs or other compliant libraries.
Email: dneary at maemo.org
Jabber: bolsh at jabber.org
More information about the MeeGo-dev