Market (Carriers) takes 30%. Thats your chance SlideMe !!
On 22 Okt., 12:47, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> I think you missed my point; To me openness is not just about
> contributing code to the platform, it's also about giving all
> applications a level playing field to build apps on (i.e. not
> restricting API access to a certain set of approved applications).
> hackbods statements indicated that there will always be functionality
> which is only available to a select few approved apps.
>
> To use your metaphor;
>
> With Linux all apps are equal, and if you want to create an application
> or kernel module to do something you can and you don't need the approval
> of Linus to do so.
>
> With Android unless you have your app signed by the same certificate as
> the platform there will be some functionality you will not be able to
> access.
>
> I hope you can see where I'm coming from now.
>
> Al.
>
>
>
> Mark Murphy wrote:
> > Luca De Marini wrote:
>
> >> Looks like it is going to be completely closed.... I believe I'll stop
> >> looking for Android and look somewhere else instead...
>
> > *head explodes*
>
> > So...let me get this straight:
>
> > -- The source code is available (http://source.android.com)
>
> > -- There is a patch process in place that is already accepting patches
> > from outside contributors
>
> > And this is "completely closed"?
>
> > Android, in this area, is behaving exactly like every other major open
> > source project in existence. A core group of folk wrote code. They wrote
> > it the way they wanted. They opened it up. They control commit rights
> > and whether to accept or deny patches. If you want it to behave
> > differently, you need to write and test replacement code, then
> > contribute it back and convince them that your patch is a good idea.
>
> > By your definition, the Linux kernel is "completely closed", because
> > only Linus and his lieutenants are capable of affecting change to the
> > kernel. Firefox, OpenOffice.org, GNOME, KDE, all the Apache projects
> > (big and small), and so forth all work this way, and so you must
> > consider them to be completely closed, too.
>
> > If you don't like the way Android is implemented today, WRITE A PATCH
> > and CONVINCE THOSE IN CHARGE to accept the patch. In the end, that's
> > what open source projects are all about.
>
> > -----------------
>
> > Now, to deal with Mr. Sutton's likely rejoinder, that the Android core
> > team won't accept a patch changing this behavior, and therefore Android
> > is closed:
>
> > Perhaps they won't accept the patch now. Perhaps not ever. That doesn't
> > mean Android is closed.
>
> > Let's go back to the Linux kernel. I can propose whatever patches I
> > want. Linus is unlikely to accept any of them prima facia, because I
> > have no track record with respect to kernel development. And he might
> > reject them on grounds that are within his rights (e.g., attempts to
> > link in proprietary code, breaks existing APIs, shoddy implementation).
> > This doesn't mean Linux is closed. It doesn't mean my patch is
> > completely bad. It does mean my patch won't get into Linux, because
> > Linus Torvalds, in the end, is the guy who defines Linux. If I keep
> > proposing a patch that causes the kernel to crash every third Wednesday
> > at 4pm Eastern, and Linus rejects it every time as being meritless and
> > moronic, this does not mean that Linux is closed.
>
> > This is how open source works.
>
> > Similarly, we can contribute patches back to Android. It's happening
> > already. Some of those patches will be accepted quickly, as they are
> > small, non-controversial changes, particularly bug fixes. Some proposed
> > patches will get debated for a long time only to be rejected. Some
> > proposed patches will get rejected out of hand. If they tend to reject a
> > lot of patches, they will get called rather unpleasant names. But, with
> > Android under an open source license, if they're accepting a reasonable
> > number of patches, they're as "open" as any other open source project.
>
> > Android may not meet your wishes or needs. You are welcome to call them
> > lots of names. Now that the source code is released, though, "closed" is
> > a profanity, and if you expect to toss that live hand grenade around
> > willy-nilly, expect me and others to get very, very pissed.
>
> --
> Al Sutton
>
> W:www.alsutton.com
> B: alsutton.wordpress.com
> T: twitter.com/alsutton
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
