Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: A Big Problem... (deleted)
OESF Forums > Distros, Development, and Model Specific Forums > Distro Support and Discussion > pdaXrom
Laze
Both Sash, hrw, koen + more are acting like children...

So lets try and stay calm.

Its true there are hacks/patches from each the different distros in the other distros. So now lets calm down.

- OZ/OE people please refrain from posting about whats better/fixed in OZ in pdaXrom related threads - your inputs and solutions are always nice. Also please don't blame our and tell bad things about in forums or IRC - sometimes we read the IRC logs and don't like it.

- Sash stop behaving like a child - yes you do great work and you know i love it. But that doesn't allow you to act like a 7 year old. If you have any problems and think pdaXrom needs som credit or something lets us talk with the OZ people in private IRC etc.

The only thing we get from these public arguments is that the regular user thinks the Zaurus future is going down the drain.

OZ/OE: Sash has the uboot working and its pretty much fixed - so lets talk and see what it gives us.

Ps. I like both distros and use them...
Cresho
about the uboot, how can this benefit a regular sharprom user? I usually bounce around between pdaXrom and OZ. Also, can i uninstall it?

What are the pro's and con's of trying to sell my unit to someone if they want the default sharprom booter and i have the uboot installed.

Im asking cuz i sold my c1000 for a c3200 and now planning of selling this one for a c3300 if when needed. I basically updated my zaurus for 250 dollars.
Antikx
QUOTE(Laze @ Apr 29 2006, 04:30 PM)
The only thing we get from these public arguments is that the regular user thinks the Zaurus future is going down the drain.
*

The OZ, Cacko and pdaXrom devs put so much into what they do and they should be proud of it. It's unfortunate that people can't forgive each other and work togther.

QUOTE(Laze @ Apr 29 2006, 04:30 PM)
Ps. I like both distros and use them...
*


Me too. After the novelty of OZ wears off, it's going to be hard pressed to decide on one.

Altbooting in a 64/64 configuration would be a nice option. Both groups working on the same ROM would be even better. One can hope.
Cresho
I install both roms at the moment just to see how far they come along. But honestly, I need just one application to work on them to make me move over.

bdicty. has my medical encyclopedia and dictionary plus more libraries.
Xromer
Laze i agree with you totally.
As i said here, it' s not productive to have a fight with anyone.
And no matter what the error is and what the lack, only discussing it without doing any controversy it' s constructive.
Instead, as they are all open environments, we should encourage people contributing and telling their own to grow as much as possibile.
BYEZ!!!! laugh.gif
cycle_55
I agree totally, keep up the good work everyone....
cmonex
yes.... i agree...

and please unite and work on only one ROM... would be so much easier for everyone... smile.gif and just better! cool.gif
adf
I think the two parties have different enough goals that anything but occasional collaboration can be expected.
Antikx
QUOTE(adf @ May 2 2006, 10:50 PM)
I think the two parties have different enough goals that anything but occasional collaboration can be expected.
*

Are their goals documented?
If so I would like to read them so that I might find it easier to plug in to a spot down the read and start helping out.
ScottYelich
QUOTE(Antikx @ May 3 2006, 12:59 PM)
QUOTE(adf @ May 2 2006, 10:50 PM)
I think the two parties have different enough goals that anything but occasional collaboration can be expected.
*

Are their goals documented?
If so I would like to read them so that I might find it easier to plug in to a spot down the read and start helping out.
*



yea... check out the flame wars last year :->

Scott
bam
imagine a single x-based rom from both OZ and pdaXrom team, that would rock big time, then get Maslovsky to get with the opie side of things....oh wait my friend just slapped me in the back of the headit will never happen....bummer.
Antikx
QUOTE(bam @ May 4 2006, 01:54 PM)
....oh wait my friend just slapped me in the back of the headit will never happen....bummer.
*


I belive they can come together.

Everyday we sacrifice the important things for the more important things. The more important thing is this community.
clofland
Agreed. Getting along is VERY important in development.

Remember, it takes two to fight.

Usually the best way to end a fight is to just admit your oponent "has a point" and move on and try to work together.
diesel1
It would be good to develop the OZ/pdaXrom systems together where possible and to work together in a common environment when there are major internal differences.

If every amount of energy spent negatively could be put to use in at least a cooperative arena, then we can, at least, say we are working in the true sense of free software development, the use and promotion of free software and ultimately providing a free and open technological future for the Human race.


PHew! blink.gif

Simon.

C860 - pdaXrom 1.1.0-Beta? Anytime, Real Soon Now? Pretty Please... biggrin.gif
Meanie
QUOTE(diesel1 @ May 5 2006, 10:21 AM)
It would be good to develop the OZ/pdaXrom systems together where possible and to work together in a common environment when there are major internal differences.

If every amount of energy spent negatively could be put to use in at least a cooperative arena, then we can, at least, say we are working in the true sense of free software development, the use and promotion of free software and ultimately providing a free and open technological future for the Human race.


PHew!  blink.gif

Simon.

C860 - pdaXrom 1.1.0-Beta?  Anytime, Real Soon Now? Pretty Please... biggrin.gif
*


I don't think one distro would be a good idea. afterall, the goals and approach of each project is different. It's like demanding all the different linux distros for the PCs to recombine d into one. Will never happen, and having many distros is a good thing as it gives you choices. However, they should be working together to make a set of compat libs so one can install and run apps written for one distro on the other similar to the alien concept.
Cresho
totally with you on this one.
karlto
Well said Meanie! I've been wanting to post something along those lines but not so good at explaining what I mean...
lardman
[My apologies in advance for this post - I know it's in the pdaXrom part of the forum and I know it mentions OpenEmbedded, but that's because I'd like to comment on the merging of sashz's work with ours.]

QUOTE
However, they should be working together to make a set of compat libs so one can install and run apps written for one distro on the other similar to the alien concept.


Unfortunately, there's not really enough room on the devices for this kind of thing.

With that said, changes (in libc, gcc, etc.) are not necessarily difficult to propogate (meaning that packages could be re-generated for each distro, etc.). The easiest way for me is to just run bitbake and have it generate all of the packages in OE automatically whenever we update libc (or gcc, or anything else for that matter.)

Although this does take time, it's completely automated, so you just issue a 'bitbake world' command and come back in a day or so (actually with ~5k packages, I think Koen said, it might now take a bit longer than that!)

I doubt we'll ever get sashz to move pdaXrom to use bitbake and the openembedded metadata, though both teams would benefit. The real issue about the transition, is that pdaXrom is written for the Zaurus (mainly - I have seen that there's an x86 version too, but I'm not sure how many changes are necessary to the metadata and build process to accomplish this) while bitbake/openembedded supports many different hardware types. This means that build instructions and the build environment has to be more complex than that for pdaXrom as there are lots of permutations.

Now there is an in-between option, to use OE for pdaXrom, but only to support the Zaurus machines. This would have the automation advantages, and would also be a start towards sharing the code between both.

Just my opinions of course. I welcome non-flaming replies,


Si
pgas
The pdaxrom builder is based on:

http://www.pengutronix.de/software/ptxdist_en.html

I'm not sure what exactly sashz has changed. (He also builds for phycore board and PS2 with it)

Basically I don't think sashz will change the way he builds pdaxrom either, or that openzaurus will go to ptxdist.....both "team" have a good knowledge of their tools and put lot of work in them. Recent history of cooperation also has shown the little "communication" problems that exist....

It's difficult to comment on how the functionalities of the 2 build systems differ as basically there are no (good or in-depth) documentation and features list for either system...

(OE has probably more meta-data, and more complex handling of dependencies, pdxdist is probably simpler and more straightforward to use - I don't talk about using "make world" vs "bitbake world")

It may seems easier to put what is missing from pdaxrom in openembbeded but I think that it would mean for sashz to start and learn from the beginning a new build system, redoing what he has allready done with ptxdist (for instance I don't know if OE builds live cds or make distribution for x86, if target exists for the phycore board or playstation, I know it doesn't create an all in one native sdk) and I 'm not sure if that what's he wants to work on....or if OE would be ready to accept the things he does the way he does them (for instance I don't know a full kde ipk would be considered as acceptable)

The opposite is also impossible, openembedded is used by a lot of developers working on different projects, have many packages and configuration that aren't in pdaxrom, it has a lot of infrastructure that doesn't exist for the pdaxrom builder (bug tracker, vc ....)

So unless people from the outside starts to work on bringing the 2 worlds together, there are 0 chances for this to happen. I'm not convinced that's so important anway...(though probably more "friendly" information exchange would be nice...)

Also I don't think that having binary compatible libs is an easy goal to achieve as in my opinion, part of the art of building a linux distro is to manage to have some things that work correctly together, so it would perhaps mean to use exactly the same set of configurations and patches for the 2 distributions ...hence making the same distribution.

A little bit of competition and to have the liberty to choose is not so bad anyway (save the insults), from a user point of view we want the best of everything but it's not allways possible.
albertr
Right to the point, pgas!
-albertr
sashz
why OZ/OE guys think their build system is best of the best and always want some must come on it? My pointview is they must come on pdaXrom/ptxdist build system.
lardman
QUOTE
why OZ/OE guys think their build system is best of the best and always want some must come on it? My pointview is they must come on pdaXrom/ptxdist build system.


Our points of view differ, but that is to be expected. I think the main reason, is that the bitbake/oe system can be used to build for a number of devices - whole range of zaurus, ipaqs, simpad, slugs, and more, without having to edit anything mroe than one config file (which says what the distro name is and what the machine is) - it all just works.

The question I was trying to ask is 'does the pdaX system also enable this flexibility without needing to edit much?' It may do, I don't know as I've not tried using it for a long time, but my impression was that the patches that were contained within it had to be tuned for each platform?

QUOTE
for instance I don't know if OE builds live cds or make distribution for x86, if target exists for the phycore board or playstation


Not sure about liveCDs either, however x86 can be built as far as I know. Dunno about the phycore board, though I understand there are targets for development boards so I suppose this is similar. I don't think anyone has tried adding the playstation as a target.

QUOTE
I know it doesn't create an all in one native sdk


It can create native SDKs.

QUOTE
or if OE would be ready to accept the things he does the way he does them (for instance I don't know a full kde ipk would be considered as acceptable)


Things will surely be accepted, however the fact that bitbake/OE supports lots of different archs means that the build instructions/patches must not be just for a specific platform. A compliant KDE .bb file (the instructions used to build it) would be accepted as long as it built, packaged and ran correctly.

Regarding the patches to the 2.6 kernel, my understanding is that rpurdie (RP) will implement them, but that, as with the rest of his work, he wants to have the changes accepted upstream. This means that specific coding/patching styles must be adopted. He said he'd work on it when he has time.


Si
Gorth
Coding, patching "styles" and arbitrary, inflexible constraints on submission and application procedures, or even asking questions suffocates creativity IMHO. It also facilitates dictatorial pronouncements by those who create such self-serving constraints.
Economies of scale are not gained, but rather a significant population of motivated, creative contributors is disenfranchised.
It is antithematic to the open-source concept and stifiling to the emergence of creative solutions to erect gateways and filtering procedures that do not accept innovation contributions that fail only on presentation protocol.
It's the ideas that count. Development efforts should be flexible enough to recognize superior ideas and find a way to accept them based on their merit.
[I apologize if this is off-topic or presented in the wrong forum, but it needs to be said somewhere]
sashz
QUOTE(lardman @ May 6 2006, 07:58 AM)
The question I was trying to ask is 'does the pdaX system also enable this flexibility without needing to edit much?' It may do, I don't know as I've not tried using it for a long time, but my impression was that the patches that were contained within it had to be tuned for each platform?


For add new system you need create target /etc directory and strartup scripts (or use one common from prepared etc and scripts) and write vendor rules file, which will finish build image procedure. There you can customize your target image.

For patches, there 5 types:
1) generic - for all targets (ex. patches/icewm-1.0.3/generic/*.{path,diff}[.gz|.bz2] )
2) by cpu architecture - appling for targets with this cpu only (ex. patches/icewm-1.0.0/arm/*.{path,diff}[.gz|.bz2] )
3) by fpu architecture - appling for targets with this fpu type only (ex. patches/icewm-1.0.0/arm-softfloat/*.{path,diff}[.gz|.bz2] )
4) by cpu + vendor - (ex. patches/icewm-1.0.0/arm-pcm027/*.{path,diff}[.gz|.bz2] )
5) by сpu + target_libc - (ex. patches/microwindows-1.0.0/sh4-newlib/*.{path,diff}[.gz|.bz2] )
lpotter
There's room for all build systems. There's more than openembedded and pdaxrom build systems out there and also more than just 2 rom image distributions. I use old buildroot for the Qtopia Trolltech roms. I prefer it over openembedded.
There's also other non free distributions as well.

Use what works for you.
Linux is all about choice, not getting tied onto only one 'thing'.

It's good to have more than one "rom", or gui environment, or build system to choose from.
lardman
QUOTE
Coding, patching "styles" and arbitrary, inflexible constraints on submission and application procedures, or even asking questions suffocates creativity IMHO. It also facilitates dictatorial pronouncements by those who create such self-serving constraints.
Economies of scale are not gained, but rather a significant population of motivated, creative contributors is disenfranchised.
It is antithematic to the open-source concept and stifiling to the emergence of creative solutions to erect gateways and filtering procedures that do not accept innovation contributions that fail only on presentation protocol.


I take umbrage at your usage of the work 'arbitrary' in this context. Afaik, the rules we're talking about are not arbitrary - they are there for a reason.

If you want to have work accepted by a project (this is on the assumption that you can't do everything yourself, if you can then it makes no odds what your coding style is), then you have to adopt some kind of style to ensure that others can actually understand what you've added. Hopefully most people will realise that the enforcement of guidelines will ensure that code is clean and understandable (as you're trying to add value for the other developers too.)

QUOTE
It's the ideas that count. Development efforts should be flexible enough to recognize superior ideas and find a way to accept them based on their merit.


Right, so let's say the ideas are out there and tested and have been seen to add value; therfore the way to have them accepted is to re-write them in whatever standard form is necessary.


Si
lardman
sashz - thanks for the explanation

lpotter - I agree, people should have choice, but hopefully there is also inter-working (is that a word?) between groups, as we are only a small community.


Si
Mickeyl
DISCLAIMER: Not speaking about OE or OZ or pdaXrom or even Zaurus here, but about the 'choice' thing among the Linux community in general, so please don't get my opinion in a wrong way.

When people are doing their prayer wheel telling about "who cares, it's better to have a choice", to me personally it always sounds like a cheap explanation for

* lack of communication skills,
* lots of duplicated work because of resistance to learn new things,
* going the easiest way,
* not taking the time to think out,
* results that are just incomplete.

Choices are cool - no kidding, it's great to have 'em...

...but I'd gladly give up chosing between 10 crappy things when I could just take the one really cool thing out there.

I really wish we (all, me included of course) had a bit more of a collaborative sense in us. All the one- and few-man-shows in Open Source land are doing no good. And that's the major reason why we suffer in contrast to the commercial stuff.
tg
The *problem* is that we all very subjective and everyone has his/her own ideas about what is crappy and/or cool (ie it is clear that Sash thinks his buildsystem is cooler than openembedded while OZ team certainly does not agree). There is nothing wrong with this - open source is about choice (which includes choice of not thinking things through as Mickey or anyone else would like but reimplementing or reinventing the wheel - it is surprising how often this seemingly wastefull activity actually leads to improved projects and better code - sometimes things are improved that were not even originally intended). I actually think this is why Linux is so great - people constantly reimplement and look at things from different angles and you never know what will come out of all the chaos. I also think that some of the flame wars are not unhealthy as they show dedication developers have to their projects and points of view. And us as users are free to read them or not - sometimes reading through these carefully actually hints at which projects really are *better* and/or more likely to make it in the long run (isn't it great to have both gnome and kde - at any one point in time over the last 10 years you could have picked a point where one of those distributions fell behind in some ways - but supporters of both stubbornly kept pushing forward and today users have a choice of two excellent alternatives - that to me is the real power of open source - why can't something like that be the case with oz and pdaxrom?).
And while I'm ranting about open source let me also add that in my opinion people should stop focusing on how to defeat M$ and aruging that without unifying projects open source does not have a chance - this is counterproductive because once you accept this approach you are playing by M$ rules and you certainly can't win that battle).
sashz
QUOTE(Mickeyl @ May 8 2006, 05:21 AM)
...but I'd gladly give up chosing between 10 crappy things when I could just take the one really cool thing out there.


What is crap and what is cool? Who willl judge?
Laze
Sash - Mickey was not pointing at anybody but making a general statement.

MickeyL i agree with you with some of the things.

Open source / Linux people have one big problem - leadership and central control but thats also why strange project and solutions popup - in a microsoft world these would be killed. He he
Glaive
Unification of pdaX & OZ won't do good to our zauruses. Each of these projects has an idea that appeals to some part of the community. But I don't think that flame wars should emerge from these differences. You guys should collaborate and share the best of these roms.

P.S i wouldn't call any of the roms crappy, so the rule about having one cool thing instead of many crapy things doesn't work here. We got a lot of really cool Z roms!
Mickeyl
*sigh* I knew my disclaimer wouldn't be enough to stop people from twisting my words the way they want to. I was thinking about hundreds of window managers, thousands of line editors, gazillions of POP3 mail clients etc...

It's probably not the proper forum for general ranting. *shrug*
Cresho
You know what's killing me here? You guys are so good at putting up the rom images but who is making the software? There are just too few people.

For the sharprom, I see tons of people but are well hidden. for the pdaxrom, just 2? and for openembedded, less than 4? for cacko, 1 and he makes his own software and redistributes a few and is also compatible with sharprom.


One of the major reasons that nobody is diving into this is.....................flexibility. kopi does wonders but not good enough. i use it myself.

I'm just saying if this division keeps going on, we seriously are going to loose alot of potential and just vanish!

I don't think we need roms. We do need softwares that can sync, run fast, and actually make us more productive. Somthing to compete vs the cellphones, ipods, and gamboys-which these devices I find to be a joke to begin with.
Meanie
QUOTE(Cresho @ May 9 2006, 09:04 AM)
You know what's killing me here?  You guys are so good at putting up the rom images but who is making the software?  There are just too few people.

For the sharprom, I only see one person.

for the pdaxrom, just 2?

and for openembedded, less than 4?

for cacko, 1 and he makes his own software and redistributes a few.


One of the major reasons that nobody is diving into this is.....................flexibility.

kopi does wonders but not good enough.  i use it myself.

I'm just saying if this division keeps going on, we seriously are going to loose alot of potential and just vanish!
*


I agree with Cresho. The ROMs/distros are fine and lots of work have been put into packaging them up, but new application development is lacking. Sure, we can compile and package most linux apps up, but a lot of them were not intended for Z use and some customisation does need to be made to them in order for them to be really useful on the Z. I say the application developers are the one the various distros need to woe and attract, not just the average users. One thing is development tools or lack of. Getting started to write apps on the Z is not easy, especially if you are from the Windows or Java world. I guess most Linux developers will be familiar with the build systems and cross compiller stuff, but for others, like me who don't have a Linux box to install a cross compiler, etc.. this is a big stumbling block and deterrent to develop apps for the Zaurus. Also, when developers write their apps. they want them to be easily ported and run on as many environments as possible. The Zaurus is just scary because it has so many distros that "apppear" to be incompatible with each other and when someone tries to decide whether to write apps for Zaurus and then finds that they have to code for one specific environment and lose a lot of potential users because they are using the other Zaurus distro. Packaging IPK files for Zauri is also so different for the various distros as in the format of the IPK file itself as well as the file locations for all the different distros. Since docs are lacking or way out of date, most potential Z app developers will just give up and continue to write windows apps. smile.gif sad.gif
One thing that attracted me to pdaXrom was that it had a preconfigured native gcc compiler that would allow me to quickly compile apps on my Zaurus directly as well as a live CD to boot off a PC to try out the environment and look and feel. It also has a VMWare image too so I can run it inside my Windows session. Sure it has many problems still, but we are talking about choice, this is kinda the type of choice I am looking for, choice of development environment. Don't forget this part of the choice equation. Ok, I finished ranting smile.gif
albertr
IMHO, there's no such thing as perfect software wink.gif

Everybody has its own tastes and preferences, so having multiply choices is a good thing. If something vanishes, something else will take its place.

-albertr
CoreDump
QUOTE(Glaive @ May 8 2006, 09:49 PM)
Unification of pdaX & OZ won't do good to our zauruses. Each of these projects has an idea that appeals to some part of the community. But I don't think that flame wars should emerge from these differences. You guys should collaborate and share the best of these roms.

P.S i wouldn't call any of the roms crappy, so the rule about having one cool thing instead of many crapy things doesn't work here. We got a lot of really cool Z roms!
*


The "unification" isn't about the ROM itself or the installed apps, just the method used to create said ROM. If pdaX decided to use OE from today it would still be the exact same ROM from a user POV.

With the difference that the user then could use the rather large and quite complete OZ feeds smile.gif
sashz
QUOTE(CoreDump @ May 8 2006, 07:23 PM)
If pdaX decided to use OE from today it would still be the exact same ROM from a user POV.

With the difference that the user then could use the rather large and quite complete OZ feeds  smile.gif
*


I agree with about large complete OZ feed, just small note - 90% of this feed is unworkable because OE guys just add but not testing it - need for speed wink.gif

From another side - if OE/OZ come to pdaXrom they will get soft-vfp, iwmmxt, "hacky optimization" etc - stuff which they want get in their future system, but which we use already about year.
cycle_55
QUOTE(sashz @ May 8 2006, 08:25 PM)
QUOTE(CoreDump @ May 8 2006, 07:23 PM)
If pdaX decided to use OE from today it would still be the exact same ROM from a user POV.

With the difference that the user then could use the rather large and quite complete OZ feeds  smile.gif
*


I agree with about large complete OZ feed, just small note - 90% of this feed is unworkable because OE guys just add but not testing it - need for speed wink.gif

From another side - if OE/OZ come to pdaXrom they will get soft-vfp, iwmmxt, "hacky optimization" etc - stuff which they want get in their future system, but which we use already about year.
*



Hi sashz

Even though I don't totally understand what is going on, i say do what feels right. Carry on the good work and don't apologize.

cycle_55
lardman
Couple of minor corrections:

QUOTE
For the sharprom, I see tons of people but are well hidden. for the pdaxrom, just 2? and for openembedded, less than 4? for cacko, 1 and he makes his own software and redistributes a few and is also compatible with sharprom.


I just asked on IRC and after a quick look at the commit logs: we have about 46 active developers, of whom 10 are very active, 20 are active and the rest commit infrequently. The numbers here are also slightly skewed, because many of the active group are also commiting patches, etc., from the bugtracker - so in fact we have more developers than these figures would indicate.

Now I should note that not all of these people are working on the Zaurus/ipaq/simpad. A rough guess is that 40% do palmtop work, 40% do nslu, and 20% do misc other devices. There are of course also a number of commercial companies doing work, but I've no idea of numbers, etc.

To summarise: more than 4 doing Zaurus/palmtop work wink.gif

QUOTE
I agree with about large complete OZ feed, just small note - 90% of this feed is unworkable because OE guys just add but not testing it - need for speed


I'd be surprised if some percentage of the available packages didn't have some issues, though I'd be very suprised if it were actually 90% (I'm just trying to think of a way of working it out, without having to install and test every package myself.) Even if only 10% did work, that would give us 10% * ~6000 packages ~= 600 packages, which is still a fair few wink.gif.

I'll do some thinking about how to work out the exact number if anyone's interested.


Si
adf
(To skip back a little)
The "one way to do things" "one best product" kinda reminds me (though I have no personal experience ) of soviet auto manufacture. As I recall, the lada wasn't really a hit, it merely prospered for lack of competition.
karlto
QUOTE(adf @ May 10 2006, 04:56 AM)
(To skip back a little)
The "one way to do things" "one best product" kinda reminds me (though I have no personal experience ) of soviet auto manufacture.  As I recall, the lada wasn't really a hit, it merely prospered for lack of competition.
*

Lada? My Zaurus is a Cadillac! laugh.gif
(especially with pdaXrom installed)
sashz
QUOTE(lardman @ May 9 2006, 07:06 AM)
QUOTE
I agree with about large complete OZ feed, just small note - 90% of this feed is unworkable because OE guys just add but not testing it - need for speed


I'd be surprised if some percentage of the available packages didn't have some issues, though I'd be very suprised if it were actually 90% (I'm just trying to think of a way of working it out, without having to install and test every package myself.) Even if only 10% did work, that would give us 10% * ~6000 packages ~= 600 packages, which is still a fair few wink.gif.

I'll do some thinking about how to work out the exact number if anyone's interested.
Si
*



lil more fire - i found in OE package directory only 1325 applications, where 6000 ? wink.gif Maybe you count split applications into few packages, locale packages, man and documentation ?
clofland
QUOTE(sashz @ May 8 2006, 12:09 PM)
QUOTE(Mickeyl @ May 8 2006, 05:21 AM)
...but I'd gladly give up chosing between 10 crappy things when I could just take the one really cool thing out there.


What is crap and what is cool? Who willl judge?
*



Good point. I do not think Sash was being nasty here guys! He was just making the point that that is part of the problem.

Mickeyl would rather have 1 nice IMAP client, than 10 crappy ones, but Sash was pointing out that the problem is that everyone has a different idea of what the 1 non-crappy IMAP client is. smile.gif

It is a problem. It isn't anybody's fault, it is just the way things are.

Remember, be nice, and give everyone the benefit of the doubt here. Text is a poor way to communicate, especially when we are from different countries and don't all use English in the same way.
clofland
Here is my thought on all of this. Am I crazy???

If someone REALLY thinks that pdaXrom should be moved over to the OE system, then it seems to me, since all of the source is there in the open, they should just start doing it. I mean, why not one more splinter? Take pdaXrom, port it to OE, make it work, prove to all of us that it works better, and if it really does do everything we want, then we'll come over to your camp.

Personally, I don't want to see Sash stop his current direction. He is pushing toward a production release a of a system that a lot of us can (and already do) make daily use of on a PDA that is starting to show its age. (Mine is anyway. smile.gif)

Sash does not want to use OE, and there really is no reason to push him to. pdaXrom has this problem you see. It works for us. It does what we want it to. So we really do not want it to change. We don't want to slow down on the development process in order to make infrastructure changes either. Honestly, in five years, most of us will have a new PDA, so delaying development of our working platform for infrastructure changes is not very appealing when what we have works so well for us.

As for OE. I think Mickey's goal is to have a system that we can be using on our new PDA's in five years too. I just wish that some of the OE guys could sit back and let that be their vindication, rather poking at us pdaXrom users now.

(NOTE: "works for us" == "works for us", not "is better" and not "yours does not work", just "works for us")

(NOTE2: I am not implying that pdaXrom has no future, just that most of the pdaXrom USERS are focused on the present. This can be seen by the fact that so many of us flash the latest RC or BETA as soon as it arrives and then proceed to use it daily in production.)
lardman
QUOTE
If someone REALLY thinks that pdaXrom should be moved over to the OE system, then it seems to me, since all of the source is there in the open, they should just start doing it. I mean, why not one more splinter? Take pdaXrom, port it to OE, make it work, prove to all of us that it works better, and if it really does do everything we want, then we'll come over to your camp.


Indeed, this is a thought that I'd had, now I just need some spare time. With that said, that spare time would be better spent improving OZ (perhaps using some of the pdaX patches, etc.), rather than trying to re-implement pdaX from scratch.

QUOTE
Sash does not want to use OE, and there really is no reason to push him to.


Yes, I agree. The point of this entire thread (at least the current part of the topic anyway), imho, is to say that that as there are so few of us, we ought to work together. One way to improve productivity would be for everyone to have the same build system, however there are probably other ways.

QUOTE
Honestly, in five years, most of us will have a new PDA, so delaying development of our working platform for infrastructure changes is not very appealing when what we have works so well for us.

As for OE. I think Mickey's goal is to have a system that we can be using on our new PDA's in five years too. I just wish that some of the OE guys could sit back and let that be their vindication, rather poking at us pdaXrom users now.


Fair point.

Anyway, I don't see anything changing regarding the usage of the build systems, so we may as well draw this (part of the) thread to a close and hopefully stop sniping at one another.

Cheers,


Si
Mickeyl
clofland put it pretty well, amen to that.

QUOTE
As for OE. I think Mickey's goal is to have a system that we can be using on our new PDA's in five years too. I just wish that some of the OE guys could sit back and let that be their vindication, rather poking at us pdaXrom users now.


Heh, right. smile.gif
sashz
QUOTE(Mickeyl @ May 10 2006, 02:45 AM)
clofland put it pretty well, amen to that.

QUOTE
As for OE. I think Mickey's goal is to have a system that we can be using on our new PDA's in five years too. I just wish that some of the OE guys could sit back and let that be their vindication, rather poking at us pdaXrom users now.


Heh, right. smile.gif
*



so new features will come to OE after 5year preparing?
lardman
biggrin.gif

Note the 'too' wink.gif

Si
amrein
http://www.oesf.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=3040

Still no go ?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.