Let me express my view on the subject: It seems we all agree that Mer+Nemo merge is something which has to be discussed in a different meeting (and in a different place).
The main subject here is about making contributions easier (and more appealing?) for *SailfishOS* users. Not Nemo, not Mer, *SailfishOS* users, from what I understood. As we all know, Sailfish is based on Mer/Nemo, so it's obvious that the meeting will revolve around Mer and Nemo as well, since those are the parts of Sailfish which are opensource. This means, I don't think we have to bring any other "vendor" or whatever into this meeting. This is a Sailfish-related meeting. Once the points will be discussed, the action points which are related to Nemo/Mer will be discussed with said "vendors". But I see that as something that happens *after* this meeting. About the current opensource/community policy at Jolla: I have to agree with Filip when he says that those questions have been asked long time ago already, and that not much has been done to address the issue so far. >From what I can tell Carsten is the only one (with Jolla hat) who really cares about improving the situation...it seems the rest of the company doesn't really do much except "talking" about "doing it together" and similar slogans. Let me get that straight, I have been doing an internship at Jolla in a timeframe which included the launch of the device, I know that most (if not all) the sailors really believe in those values. They really want to do it together and make all those slogans come true. But...but...but...there's some real action missing in the picture. It seems everyone at Jolla wants to push Sailfish into the right direction but nobody is willing to reprioritize the important things in the company, to allow sailors to spend more time on this aspect of the "product". Jolla will *always* be in a rush to keep up with features and bugfixes, in the foreseeable future. That's inevitable, given the size of Jolla compared to that of competitors. So, leaving the community aspect aside because "we have deadlines for features and bugfixes" will not work. Again, Jolla is small, that will *always* be the case, in the foreseeable future. Jolla just has to learn to live with that, and yet be able to reserve time to develop the community aspect. That is, of course, if Jolla really wants to be a community-friendly company, as it says in its known slogans. I've already heard "we've been in a rush to deliver features/fixbugs, but *now* we have more time to get this right" twice or even three times, before this thread. And still, not really much has happened. Now, this said, I really appreaciate the attempt to plan a meeting with the community, and I want to state some of the things/people which (IMHO) cannot be missing from such a meeting: - *at least* one of the people in Jolla who can really take decisions in the company. Having some sailors (developers) won't help. Sailors can help explain the status of known bugs, but for this kind of "planning" thing the community has to be able to talk to people who can really make a difference. We all know escalating community requests to high levels doesn't work most of the times. - a lot of time: there will be many people who want to express their opinion, having the managers (people from the point above) leave because "we have another meeting in 5 minutes" will just make things worse. - humbleness from both sides That said, I believe in Jolla and I think we'll get this right, eventually. And we'll do it together :) faenil 2014-04-05 11:43 GMT+02:00 "Thomas B. Rücker" <tho...@ruecker.fi>: > On 04/05/2014 08:21 AM, "Thomas B. Rücker" wrote: > > On 04/05/2014 08:12 AM, Carsten Munk wrote: > >> On 04/04/14 19:39, Filip Kłębczyk wrote: > >>> W dniu 04.04.2014 18:00, Carsten Munk pisze: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> There has been a lot of discussion surrounding SailfishOS, the open > >>>> source parts of it (incl. middleware within Mer and Nemo Mobile > >>>> project) > >>>> and collaboration methods/practices -- and that we can do better than > >>>> how things are today. > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Your mail is direct reaction to this widely retweeted tweet today: > >>> > >>> https://twitter.com/fk_lx/status/452037379038408704 > >>> > >>> and previous discussion that was conducted on Twitter. It's worth to > >>> notice problem was published long time ago at Together, before it > became > >>> hot: > >>> > >>> > https://together.jolla.com/question/680/co-creation-leading-to-co-development/#post-id-1214 > >>> > >>> > >>> > https://together.jolla.com/question/680/co-creation-leading-to-co-development/#post-id-6833 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Since that time, no significant actions have been taken to fix that, > but > >>> that can be understood and justified considering other important things > >>> for Jolla like preparing to MWC and Sailfish going out of beta. > >>> > >> It's safe to say that we've been in a crazy race to conditionally > >> deliver features, fixes and ensuring our existence. > >> > >> We would probably have had more time if we didn't switch SoC and do a > >> Qt4->Qt5 + X11/Wayland transition; it's been too busy and we've lagged > >> behind in doing proper open development with roadmapping ('Do > >> everything needed to deliver a working product' isn't a good roadmap > >> item), explaining our actions, transparency around our open source > >> components. It's a good time to something about it now. > >> > >> The discussions you link to have been a big source of inspiration to > >> do something about this topic, as there has been many valid points in > >> them. > >> > >>> We would really like to have constructive talk with the decisive people > >>> around Sailfish, that have real influence and can change how open > source > >>> collaboration looks in practice (whoever those people are). > >>> We also want > >>> for Jolla engineers who work on open source parts take part in that > >>> discussion, as it's a topic that is directly connected with their work. > >> I will do my best to make sure that the right people will be there - a > >> meeting where nobody can take actions or act on the meeting results > >> isn't a good one. > >> > >>> I only have doubts that if it will be normal, uncontrolled IRC > >>> discussion, that it might result in chaos (like many of those that were > >>> made on this topic on IRC before). > >>> I wanted to give my own proposal how > >>> such discussion should look like from organizational point of view, so > >>> there would be a chance for it's results to be satisfying for both > sides > >>> (Jolla & OSS community). > >>> > >> I agree, we still have time to set up an agenda - first thing you need > >> to do is set a date in advance to make sure people will show up, then > >> a proper agenda. > >> > >> I've opened an etherpad at http://piratepad.net/SailfishOSSMeeting - > >> please add topics for discussion. > >> > >> Agenda is intentionally left blank as to make sure proper agenda items > >> are brought up. > >> > >> A background thing for this meeting is that (this is with my Mer and > >> Nemo middleware hat on), there is an idea and/or intention is to merge > >> the Mer and Nemo middleware repositories and infrastructure > >> (bugtracker, git repositories, OBS repositories) together under the > >> Mer project. > >> > >> There has been a long unnatural split between Mer and Nemo middleware > >> and a bit unclear one sometimes; causing also a semi-fork of Mer > >> packages (Qt5) as Mer couldn't move fast enough. In the end, what most > >> want from Mer is a solid mobile core and hence ended up using a > >> combination of Mer and Nemo middleware anyway. > >> > >> In that regard, there is a good opportunity to establish new practices > >> and patterns of collaboration, hence why this meeting is a good thing > >> to start with. > >> > >> In the ideal future world from my point of view, if you'd like to > >> contribute to SailfishOS open source middleware; you'd be contributing > >> to Mer. Currently it is too confusing to contribute to - too much > >> split information, different practices, different bugtrackers, even > >> differing packaging practices, etc. > > Reading this I can't help but wonder if Jolla now claims ownership of > > Mer/Nemo then. Even with fancy hat changing. Bringing this discussion up > > in a strictly Sailfish context implies this. > > There are other downstream projects relying on Mer and I'd expect this > > to be discussed with them, in a completely "vendor neutral" setting. Mer > > used to be big about this, before it got dragged into a "ship a product" > > race of one of the involved parties. > > I think I want to expand this a bit, not to come over as hostile, which > is not my intention. The following is my personal view on things. > > It is well known, that Jolla has been the major contributor and driver > in Mer and Nemo. > People who follow my statements should know that I've been also very > positive about most of Jolla development regarding Mer and Nemo as used > in Sailfish, leading directly to public repository commits. No big > reveals for those who understood where to look. Something that I have > yet to see many other commercial projects get right. > > What got heavily blurred along the way to the Jolla phone though was the > distinction between Sailfish development and Mer/Nemo development. > > Sailfish is a commercial phone operating system, basing on Mer, Nemo and > the Linux kernel. This means that there inevitably are things where > business interests intersect with openness and the result is that things > will rather be following business. It is a kind of fog of war, where it > becomes unclear what is what and the main objective becomes the shipping > product. Also there is a big constraint that people suddenly wear many > hats and it's easy to forget which one you should wear. Rationalization > becomes a huge factor. > > Those are from what I see natural tendencies. Also there are no other > comparably sized parties contributing to Mer/Nemo. There are several > other projects around it though. There is an active community on the Mer > mailing list. > > Just to round this out a bit. There is a lot to discuss and a lot is yet > to be clarified. Also why I posed the question in the first place > > > >>> I haven't had time to made it yet, because I > >>> had quite busy day, but I hope the fact that Carsten already took first > >>> step and proposed a meeting does still give me a chance for doing that. > >>> I think it's really important for the discussion to have proper and > calm > >>> form and I think it's possible considering goodwill on both sides. > >> Yes, I think we can do this. > >> > >>> Regards, > >>> Filip > >>> > >>> PS. Personally I really count that Marc Dillon (Head of Software > >>> Development in Jolla) will take part in it. > >> BR > >> Carsten Munk > > > > Just my 0,02€ > > > > Thomas > > Another 2¢ > > Thomas > _______________________________________________ > SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list >
_______________________________________________ SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
