Look at how the Eclipse Foundation handles an open source project.
Each component/project has clear and SEPARATE roadmap, wiki,
documentation, bug reports, web pages, mailing lists and so forth.
This allows for a really transparent and encouraging environment for
developers, even occasional/hobbyist developers, to try and
contribute. Furthermore having worked in a corporate environment
contributing to Eclipse this transparency only aided the development.
Big corporations like clearly defined deadlines, release trains and
project structures. The open source community likes transparency. Both
can coexist! Otherwise what is the point of being open sourced!
Before even STARTING development of Donut I would spend a lot of my
resources on building a good ecosystem. Putting the work now, will pay
far larger dividends latter when all the OHA members and enthusiasts
can easily contribute to the AOSP. Specially when OHA members can take
over projects from Google, freeing up the appropriate resources to
develop innovate new projects.
On Apr 23, 3:06 pm, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com
> Silence (as now) is one extreme. Those are a couple of others. How about
> something in the middle? Run AOSP as an open source project, let the closed
> source trees branch off when they need to based on their secret
> And as the other poster said, even a basic moderately-ordered list of "these
> are the current engineering priorities" would be a large improvement.
> To be very clear, I'm not asking for a date, although it would be nice. I'm
> asking for tasks. (Or maybe I am missing something - wouldn't be the first
> time. Iis there a list where the various features/tasks/milestones for each
> release is being discussed publically? Without that, it sure looks like the
> same thing all over again.)
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Mike Lockwood <lockw...@android.com
> > Disconnect: If we gave you a date for donut would that make you
> > happier? I doubt it. Or are you suggesting that all the members on
> > this mailing list should have a democratic vote on the release date,
> > and us engineers doing the actual work will try really hard to get it
> > done by that date for you?
> > Mike
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Disconnect <dc.disconn...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > > So AOSP will continue to be driven by closed source requirements at least
> > > through donut? Thats unencouraging.
> > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Dianne Hackborn <hack...@android.com
> > > wrote:
> > >> As always, the current roadmap is here:
> > >>http://source.android.com/roadmap
> > >> I realize this doesn't provide much detail, but at this point we really
> > >> don't want to be in the position of making even implied commitments that
> > >> people are then going to base device schedules around when we are not
> > >> confident enough about them.
> > >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Jerry Jih <jjih0...@gmail.com
> > >>> Dear Mike,
> > >>> 1. How about the release schedule of Donut?
> > >>> 2. How about the major difference between Cupcake and Donut? (WVGA,
> > AGPS,
> > >>> ...)
> > >>> 3. Any impact for CTS and GMS if using Cupcake?
> > >>> Jerry
> > >>> 2009/4/23 Mike Lockwood <lockw...@android.com
> > >>>> Cupcake is using the 2.6.27 kernel. We are planning on moving to
> > >>>> 2.6.29 for the next release (donut).
> > >>>> Mike
> > >>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Dan Raaka <danra...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > >>>> > Please confirm what version of kernel will be in cupcake FC?
> > >>>> > The cupcake preview SDK seems to contain 2.6.27, but there are
> > >>>> > references to even 2.6.30 on the gitweb
> > >>>> >http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=kernel/msm.git;a=summary
> > >>>> > -Dan
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Mike Lockwood
> > >>>> Google android team
> > >> --
> > >> Dianne Hackborn
> > >> Android framework engineer
> > >> hack...@android.com