[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: impromptu IRC meeting



On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Neil Jerram wrote:

> Is that a real problem, from a Debian point of view?  Aren't we entering
> a phase of multiple display management choices anyway, with Wayland
> coming along?  I would have thought that direct framebuffer access, with
> a complementary window management model, was an equally valid choice as
> using either X or Wayland.

For Debian thats fine, for me personally there are too many apps and
toolkits that don't support anything other than X11. GTK+ for instance
has dropped DirectFB support.

> Also note that QtMoko supports starting an X server temporarily to run X
> clients.

I'm glad that works now, the first time I tried it I didn't have any
luck. Unfortunately since the AUX button is broken on my gta02 I have
no way of exiting the app lauched. On the other phone running Debian
(Galaxy S) I have there is no "AUX" either. In the end it is a bit of
a kludge IMO.

> And also oFono.  But there are many examples of similar duplication in
> Debian, so is that really a notable problem?  Passing through a phase of
> (middleware) duplication can be a practical prequel to converging on a
> single solution.

It is only a problem if we want people to be able to use it on an
arbitrary device they happen to have available for installing Debian;
say an old device from a friend or their previous phone after
upgrading. I can understand continuing to use the QtMoko-specific
middleware for gta02 but for new devices it would be much better in
the long term to enhance the common middleware. FSO already supports
more devices, playing catch-up forever probably is not a good idea.

> Do you mean just because of drivers/changes not being mainlined, or are
> there other reasons?

The mainline issue, which isn't really different in any other distro/UI.

> I can't speak for Radek, the main upstream developer, but I'm a small
> part of upstream, and my view is that we still have too many functional
> issues to worry about to make Debianisation a priority ourselves.  Also
> I'm not personally a DD or DM yet.  But I believe that Debianisation
> would be a good long term structure for QtMoko; I am certainly not
> hostile to that.

Good to hear. No need to be a DD/DM to help get it into Debian and I
imagine you would some sponsors among the DDs who use QtMoko on their
gta02. QtMoko is already Debianised but the packaging is suboptimal
(installs in /opt for eg).

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


Reply to: