On Thursday 08 January 2015 11:32:48 Carsten Haitzler wrote: > > What is unacceptable is not being allowed to review. > > > > There were multiple offers for review at the time when the APIs were being > > designed, but no opportunity for that was given. Not even to ensure > > compatibility with 3.0 needs, such as multiuser or 3-domain SMACK. > > > > Therefore, we still reserve the right to review. If a feature is found to > > be incompatible with a major Tizen 3 goal, it can and will be modified > > (or even removed), regardless of whether 3rd parties may be using it. > > wait a sec. you write that as if you (intel) are the sole owners of > tizen as of 3.0 onwards - the needs of let's say tizen mobile or > anything else that is being worked on in tizen 2 land still are > irrelevant in your view of tizen if those needs were to clash with for > example ivi needs.
Hi Carsten This comes from the simple fact that all changes to Tizen need to be reviewed. Since the review was skipped in the 2.3 development process, it needs to happen now. Every developer is allowed this right and the governance requires it to happen. "Compatibility with 2.3" cannot be used as a reason for accepting a broken change that wasn't reviewed before. It could have been if the change had been reviewed -- that would have been our collective mistake. That said, I don't expect this to be a big deal. Since the 2.3 development process could not accept the offer of review, I expect that the development redoubled its efforts to review to compensate from the lack of feedback. Besides, the goals for 3.0 were known at the time (and much of it already implemented!), so it's reasonable to expect that those goals were taken into account in developing the 2.3 goals. > you might want to realize that there are more people involved in tizen > than just intel and the needs of others matter too. what you are saying > is that, for example, multiuser needs of ivi trump the needs of mobile > and you will use the tizen review process to enforce that. that is the > tone of your email. No, that's not what I am saying at all. I was specifically saying that Mobile needs *don't* trump IVI needs. I was fearing that "2.3 compatibility" would be used as an excuse to break what has been done. In fact, I am saying that multiuser needs of IVI deserves the *exact* same respect and attention as the mobile needs. The multiuser support was reviewed and discussed before being accepted. Therefore, all other changes to Tizen Mobile 3.0 need the same. So this is simply what Dominique was asking for: visibility of the changes so that they can be properly reviewed by anyone interested. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
