It's the "...which represents what most users are using" clause that makes it a gold standard. Tom.
2009/4/11 Mariano Kamp <[email protected]> > I wouldn't actually consider building a working image from the source the > gold standard. I think it is essential the pre-requisite to breath some life > into independent activities outside Google. Al providing nightly builds are > a prime example. > But I agree that Google is probably working on that and it's just in line > with the prevailing communication style not to make this transparent. > > Btw. I would be really interested in an explanation what the rationale > behind this communication style is. > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Tom Gibara <[email protected]> wrote: > >> My opinion, and its nothing more than that, is that the ability to >> "build a working system from the public repository which represents what >> most users are using" represents a gold standard that the Android community >> can aspire to but not expect any time soon. I simply don't think such a >> simple binary metric is adequate to evaluate such a large project. >> >> A few clarifications to my previous post: by Android I (approximately) >> mean the public repository. When someone derives something from Android - >> say by using it as the operating system for a new mobile phone - I do not >> regard that as Android. Immediately, this resolves our differences on (1) >> and (2). As for (3) and (4) I wasn't making a case that any of my criteria >> are pre-requisites for a project to be deemed "open source", only that they >> contribute to my evaluation of the openness of any given software project. >> Incidentally, just because a bug's status is not being updated in the public >> tracker doesn't mean it isn't being tracked internally in a separate system. >> >> I never expected that all of the source code necessary to build say a >> fully working image for the G1 or Google's applications would be open >> because I always expected Android would be a platform that would be built >> upon by closed-source applications and devices. It's unfortunate that many >> people seem to feel betrayed that these things are not available. I think >> few people argue that the use of Linux in closed devices makes it less open >> and I see Android as little different. >> >> Disconnect's post about the deficiencies of the current process has a >> valid point to the extent that that the relationship between the closed and >> open trees seems to be inverted, but why assume that Google's engineers >> don't know this aren't working extremely hard to address it? I would tend to >> assume the opposite. >> >> Tom >> >> >> 2009/4/11 Al Sutton <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> Tom, >>> >>> My metric is simple; Can I build a working system from the public >>> repository >>> which represents what most users are using?, and the answer to that is >>> currently no. >>> >>> To me there are many products being labelled Android; There are the ones >>> that are used on devices, there are the ports that people have made to >>> new >>> platforms, and there is the public repository, and although all these are >>> different in their own way people seem to pick attributes from each and >>> say >>> that's what Android is. >>> >>> As I see things, the answers to your metrics are; >>> >>> (1) You can for the Android open source project, but not for the version >>> of >>> Android that's shipped on the G1, Magic, or ADP1. I will happily admit I >>> am >>> wrong if someone can give me the git revision numbers from the open >>> source >>> project which will build all the open source components of the "official" >>> updates for these platforms. >>> >>> (2) Again, yes for the open source repo, but again builds from the open >>> source repo are not what's in use by a majority of Android users. >>> >>> (3) I've contributed code to "closed source" products before after the >>> source code was made available to me under an NDA. I did not work for the >>> company at the time and I did not get paid for the contribution, so I'm >>> not >>> sure it's a metric of an open source project. I've also had contributions >>> to >>> projects considered as open source sit in a review tree for 6 months and >>> then one another developer submit the same code and it gets integrated >>> (this >>> was a 1 line fix, and so the fix was *exactly* the same). Therefore I'd >>> say >>> this metric possibly isn't a charactistic that identifies an open source >>> product >>> >>> (4) I would again disagree that bugs are ignored, as I stated in my >>> original >>> email there are bugs that are still marked as new after five and a half >>> months. This means they haven't even reached the "reviewed" stage even >>> though many later bugs have. I would also disagree it's a metric of an >>> open >>> source product as there are numerous public criticisms of Windows, and >>> the >>> developers complaining over problems submitting iPhone apps are well >>> publicised, and both of these are closed source projects. >>> >>> I think the main point of our differences is that you see Android as one >>> thing, whereas I see Android as the basis for many things which are >>> trading >>> off a brand, and to me that's like saying IBMs HTTPD is open source >>> because >>> it has a codebase built on Apache (Thanks to Disconnect in >>> http://andblogs.net/2009/04/android-and-open-source/ for bringing the >>> IBM/Apache link up). >>> >>> Al. >>> --- >>> >>> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * >>> >>> ====== >>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the >>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, >>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. >>> >>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not >>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's >>> subsidiaries. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tom Gibara >>> Sent: 11 April 2009 12:09 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: [android-developers] Re: SDKs & comparison with the iPhone >>> >>> >>> Hi Al, >>> >>> >>> I think my response might best have been posted to android-discuss, but >>> I'll >>> reply here anyway. >>> >>> Pre-empting a debate about whether Android is open source with the >>> argument >>> "...let's be honest..." isn't adequate. I don't know whether there are >>> established metrics for measuring a degree to which a project rates as >>> being >>> "open source", but here are some of mine: >>> >>> (1) Can I make use of the code and do so freely? >>> (2) Can I distribute the code free of onerous conditions? >>> (3) Can I contribute? >>> (4) Can I be openly critical? >>> >>> By all of these metrics I regard Android as open source. >>> >>> (1) I regularly access the git repository to learn how various Android >>> components work. I downloaded and successfully built an SDK based on >>> cupcake >>> for a preview of forthcoming IMF. On a few private scratch projects, I've >>> copied widget code out of the android framework and tweaked it to make my >>> own UI components. I neither sought nor needed permission from Google to >>> do >>> any of these things because the code was licensed so as to give me these >>> freedoms. >>> >>> (2) Since almost all of the source code is licensed under the Apache >>> License >>> I feel very comfortable distributing any software I derive from it since >>> it's an extremely permissive and well understood license. I've seen a >>> number >>> of people post in this, and other groups, that the absence of some code >>> from >>> the repository disqualifies Android from being open source; even that the >>> inability to create an installable phone image betrays a malign intent. I >>> don't hold with these arguments - they would carry weight if Android was >>> only operable on one model/brand of hardware but since that's >>> demonstrably >>> not the case I'm contemptuous of them. >>> >>> (3) I have to-date made one very modest contribution to the Android code >>> base, but intend to make more when time permits. My limited experience so >>> far is that the Android engineers are extremely receptive to >>> contributions >>> pitched at a technical level and supportive of anyone trying to commit >>> code. >>> Perhaps others have had a different experience. I do anticipate that >>> programmers who think they are going to sweep in and carve out whole new >>> areas of functionality inside the core frameworks will probably be >>> disappointed, but due to an inadequate understanding of how large >>> projects >>> need to operate rather than by intransigent Google staff. >>> >>> (4) This is an important freedom that is not necessarily guaranteed by >>> the >>> preceding ones. I include a public bug reporting system as an element of >>> this. Android has one and there is little evidence that Google engineers >>> ignore the bugs filed there. It's clear that there is insufficient public >>> visibility of the statuses of issues, but that's not the same thing. >>> Reading >>> the android related groups demonstrates that criticisms of Android, >>> irrespective of how well founded they may be, are freely accommodated >>> even >>> though the groups are moderated by Google employees. >>> >>> Given the personal observations above, I find the argument that Android >>> is >>> not an open source project simply misguided. Perhaps it arises in many >>> instances from a lack of experience with open-source or alternatively >>> large >>> scale software development. I'm not denying that there are some key >>> problems, especially concerning the state of the master branch. >>> Nevertheless, having closely observed the progress of the android project >>> since its first public announcement I believe that things have improved >>> considerably and that they will continue to improve; both the core >>> Android >>> team and the community (as with your interim builds) will have a role to >>> play >>> >>> I'm not qualified to comment on the experience of releasing iPhone >>> applications, and I'm inclined to believe what you report - that the >>> experience of most iPhone developers is not as negative as many websites >>> like to report. For companies and individuals who are looking to generate >>> more revenue more quickly that they might with an Android application, I >>> would do nothing to dissuade them from investigating other opportunities; >>> the iPhone foremost. >>> >>> Nevertheless, I regard it as almost inevitable that those with power will >>> ultimately abuse it. As a consequence I believe that Apple will >>> ultimately >>> abuse their monopoly of the App Store. In contrast, I expect the open >>> source >>> nature of Android to protect its community of users from egregious abuses >>> that could be countenanced by present or future management of Google or >>> the >>> OHA. >>> >>> I regard the ceding of software to its related community via the process >>> of >>> "open sourcing" it as analogous to the establishment of a democracy which >>> forces the government to be reasonable with those governed and thus >>> protects >>> against the worst excesses of its corruption. Companies that open source >>> the >>> software they produce are serving their users by protecting them against >>> the >>> potential actions of future management. Given the significant commitment >>> that I must make to any new platform I adopt, I regard this as any >>> extremely >>> beneficial provision. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> 2009/4/11 Al Sutton <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> >>> Now before I start on the iPhone comparison I'm going to pre-empt >>> the normal >>> "But Android is open source....." response by saying lets be >>> honest >>> and >>> admit it as it stands Android is not an open source project >>> because >>> the >>> public "open source" repository is pretty worthless in its' >>> current >>> state. >>> >>> The last time I tried to build the master branch it failed missing >>> some >>> Google internal API classes. The SDKs I've produce from the >>> cupcake >>> branch >>> seem to be considered by Google employees as pretty useless with >>> comments >>> like "This is why we want to be clear it is "unofficial," because >>> it >>> is not >>> actually a working SDK" being thrown around and networking in the >>> emulator >>> still being broken a week after users started reporting the >>> showstopper >>> problem (And Romain did hint that Google have a fix, I read >>> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/msg/41fcefc36bd16d44as >>> "there is a version where this is fixed"). And as we all know you >>> can't use >>> it to build the exact versions of the open source parts of either >>> of >>> the two >>> firmware versions that have shipped on the G1. >>> >>> To me it seems little more than code dump which is aimed at >>> ensuring >>> Google >>> can keep saying "But it is open source and not just a Google >>> project" >>> >>> Now, in the last week I had few conversations with iPhone >>> developers >>> so I >>> could compare the Android developer experience to that of what is >>> perceived >>> as our nearest competitor and they are laughing at us (seriously, >>> when I >>> mentioned the G1 most of them responded by initially chuckling). >>> The >>> general >>> consensus among them was; >>> >>> - Yes, you pay $99 for the iPhone dev kit, but you get "free" >>> external >>> testing (i.e. at apple) and commercial quality support with many >>> queries >>> being turned around in hours or a couple of days at worst. Compare >>> that to >>> some of the support queries on b.android.com for basic problems >>> things like >>> a Android failing to connect to wireless lans with hidden SSID >>> (http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1041) which, >>> after *five >>> and a half months* is still marked as "New" and doesn't have a >>> single >>> response from a Google employee. >>> >>> - The most common cause of App Store listing rejections are things >>> that >>> users would complain about anyway. This includes things like >>> performance >>> characteristics, UI anomalies, and inconsistent behaviour. This is >>> the type >>> of stuff that is left for users to find out on Android and only >>> comes to >>> light when 1* or 2* comments are posted and even then you don't >>> know >>> if it's >>> a one off on the users device or possibly something specific to >>> their region >>> (http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=2372). >>> >>> - The normal amount of time from submission to app store listing >>> is >>> around 7 >>> days. Some apps take months to go through the approval process, >>> but >>> that is >>> because of intellectual property concerns, concerns over offensive >>> content, >>> or is because the app has to be re-reviewed a few times to meet >>> the >>> apples >>> performance and behaviour guidelines. Yes it's not as fast as >>> Android, but >>> you know that once it's on the market it's of a quality where >>> you're >>> not >>> going to get bombarded with user queries about problems straight >>> off. >>> >>> - Most of the developers actually feel valued by Apple and feel >>> that >>> Apple >>> does what it can to make sure they get the tools they need to do >>> their job >>> and ensure they're apps. This has been re-enforced by allowing the >>> developers to beta test the new firmware and develop against it. >>> >>> Personally, it's made me shell out $99 for an iPhone SDK, dust off >>> my Nokia >>> N81, and spend $75 on eBay on a Blackberry so I can explore the >>> alternatives. >>> >>> Al. >>> >>> --- >>> >>> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * >>> >>> ====== >>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the >>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, >>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. >>> >>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not >>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or >>> it's >>> subsidiaries. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
