herpderp
|
2012-10-06
, 16:42
|
Posts: 329 |
Thanked: 422 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
@ derpton
|
#1671
|
|
2012-10-06
, 16:44
|
Posts: 1,548 |
Thanked: 7,510 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Czech Republic
|
#1672
|
All other components, that are the package manager, basic libraries, kernel etc. are already provided.
Mer does not provide a kernel - this is part of the Hardware Adaptation that vendors need to deliver.
Instead Mer provides packaging support and defines the CONFIG_ options that are usually needed for a Mer device.
A kernel of 2.6.32 or higher is required
|
2012-10-06
, 16:45
|
|
Posts: 3,404 |
Thanked: 4,474 times |
Joined on Oct 2005
@ Germany
|
#1673
|
Jolla's sailfish is excused for not being out already.
but wtf is happening with Tizen?
where is it?
|
2012-10-07
, 00:48
|
Posts: 1,298 |
Thanked: 2,277 times |
Joined on May 2011
|
#1674
|
Excellent summary, I can't wait till all of this if 100% clarified (at least the MeR/Sailfish platforms, maybe not everything about Jolla OS) on Nov. 21st.
I hope that they can finally start answering some of our questions then (maybe even some before), & the remainder or new ones after the 21st.
|
2012-10-07
, 01:58
|
|
Posts: 1,986 |
Thanked: 7,698 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Dayton, Ohio
|
#1675
|
What worries me, that Mer is already set up as a base for OEMs and vendors. If Sailfish will take that role - won't it cause a confusion and more fragmented situation? I.e. if Mer is a common platform for Mer deriatives, it's easier to target all of them. If Sailfish will become its own "common ground", won't it obscure Mer role for vendors? It really requires a clear explanation.
|
2012-10-07
, 03:23
|
Posts: 1,298 |
Thanked: 2,277 times |
Joined on May 2011
|
#1676
|
|
2012-10-07
, 05:21
|
|
Posts: 1,671 |
Thanked: 11,478 times |
Joined on Jun 2008
@ Warsaw, Poland
|
#1677
|
Here Sailfish will be using Mer, but will pose as a metadistro. Since Mer is already a metadistro for vendors - that's confusing. Unless Sailfish is intended as a higher level metadistro, with additional components which Mer lacks, which it intends to standardize (not sure what those are). If those will be open - it'll be OK I guess. If they'll be closed but still posed as meta components - that's very much not OK.
|
2012-10-07
, 05:26
|
Posts: 1,298 |
Thanked: 2,277 times |
Joined on May 2011
|
#1678
|
|
2012-10-07
, 05:31
|
|
Posts: 1,671 |
Thanked: 11,478 times |
Joined on Jun 2008
@ Warsaw, Poland
|
#1679
|
This sounds OK. So does it mean that Sailfish intendeds to standardize some "product style" UI guidelines / templates etc. which Jolla intends for others to use? Or standardize some proprietary stack (like codecs)? I.e. what is the point in that layer if vendors prefer to create their own UIs, and Jolla's UI will be specific to Jolla.
|
2012-10-07
, 05:38
|
|
Posts: 1,986 |
Thanked: 7,698 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Dayton, Ohio
|
#1680
|
Here Sailfish will be using Mer, but will pose as a metadistro. Since Mer is already a metadistro for vendors - that's confusing. Unless Sailfish is intended as a higher level metadistro, with additional components which Mer lacks, which it intends to standardize (not sure what those are).
Tags |
jolla, jolla on topic, jollamobile, meego, merproject, nokia, nokian9, professionals, speculations, tizenjolla |
|