[maemo-developers] [maemo-developers] Maemo alarms ==> retutime

[From: Weinehall David (Nokia-M/Tampere)]

On mån, 2006-08-07 at 09:45 +0200, ext Koen Kooi wrote:

[snip]

> This is worrying me a lot. You're effectively saying "We don't want the
> community to be involved". I'm pretty close to exchanging 'maemo' with
> 'qtopia' (and vice versa) in this mail:
> http://lists.trolltech.com/qtopia-interest/2006-06/msg00000.html and
> repost it to this list.

NO, I'm definitely not saying that.  As soon as we have a working
implementation with a sane design, we'll begin the legal process
and make the development of the framework public.  The only reason
I posted about the on-going work on the alarm framework was because
a lot of people have asked whether such work was taking place or not.
The answer to that question is yes.

You cannot both complain about us not detailing our future plans for the
alarm functionality, and then complain when we do so (well, it's your
imperative to complain however you like of course, but it doesn't really
make sense).

We want to involve the community as much as possible, but doing it in
the design phase for the first version just isn't efficient, especially
since the new framework needs to work-around the issues of the somewhat
lacking (to say the least) alarm support in the 770...

Instead of building straw-men, feel free to come with suggestions on
what the alarm framework should support, and to ask questions about the
current status.


Regards: David
-- 
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?