Plasma active 3 irc meeting

Thomas Pfeiffer colomar at
Wed Jan 18 22:43:36 UTC 2012

On Wednesday 18 January 2012 19:02:03 Marco Martin wrote:
> Hi all,
> some arguments for tomorrow, since it will be about PA3 priorities:
> * security framework, how far push it (and what else has high/higher
> priority) 
> * base system -> final migration to MeeGo

Migration to MeeGo? Do you mean migration to Mer?

> * missing features: resource browser, more applications and.. ?
> * how much time to be spent exclusively on fixes

+1, these are all very important points.

However, what I would put as a meta-question above them all, from a product 
What do we want PA3 to be?

For me, PA1 was a great proof of concept, PA2 was the refined version of it. 
Do we want PA3 to be another proof of concept, but this time for even more 
advanced technology? Or do we want to create a strong platform for app 
developers to fill with life?
Or do we want to focus on turning PA3 into an actual product, one that real 
users would want to replace their tablet's OS with? Would that be realistic? 
And if so: What should be its USP?

We should come up with one single phrase or term that captures the essence of 
what we want PA3 to be.

I think this is an even more important question to ask, because from the 
answer to that question we can derive the answers to the other questions. For 
example, if we want to create a proof of concept for a "secure" mobile OS, 
most resources should go into the security part. If we want an actual product, 
things like the resource browser and some key applications would gain 
importance, as well as stability and performance. If we want to focus on 
developers, a lot of work should go into Plasma Components, UI Guidelines, 
documentation and stuff.

I'm looking forward to tomorrow's meeting as well, and I'd be really happy if 
we came up with something I could write on my whiteboard in big letters ;)

More information about the Active mailing list