First and foremost, thank you all for speaking your minds. Ongoing intelligent discussion must continue to occur on this project.
Why don't you actually try to look at and understand what we have, before spouting off?
I really am Thom, I really am. It's not easy when this system is so large. I understand everything very well in my head; it's the implementation that is lacking right now.
Shake your head? Do you understand what Orbiter actually does?
I don't think you do.
I do understand what it does (mostly). I don't understand all of the intricacies of the C++ language but I can read it and tell what it is doing. I have spent hundreds of hours reading the code in svn. I've been following svn changes daily for about two years and I'm investigating many aspects of the system and improving my knowledge every day.
and circumventing the PPL? That's funny. You still have to run Proxy Orbiter on the core.. Guess what? That's a subclass of Orbiter. PPL code.
Okay, circumventing was a bad choice of words. My understanding of the licences that commercial installers have undertaken (and yes this may vary) is that they pay a fee when the sell a device that is 'intended to run orbiter', so if they sell a hybrid that runs orbiter they will pay a licencing fee for that device, but not a fee for each instance of orbiter the hybrid runs. Then they can supply as many additional devices that run a 'touch orbiter' or 'web orbiter' without having to pay any additional licencing fees for those devices. Example: If I am a re-seller and sell a device with 'Orbiter' installed or intended to run 'Orbiter' then I must pay a fee to pluto when I sell this device. But... if I sell a device installed or intended to run 'Touch Orbiter' then I will not have to pay the fee when I sell this device, no PPL code or applications. This is my understanding.
Compiling Orbiter with at least -DMAEMO_NOKIA770 and -DPADORBITER will get you a native orbiter that can run on Linux. You can also do -DUSE_GTK to use the GTK Progress bar and prompt code. Just be sure to copy GTKGlade.orbiter in the src/Linux directory to /usr/pluto/bin...
I don't believe I've tried the options together I will, thank you. I tried -DPADORBITER but without any the other options.
And yes, Orbiter will be rewritten at some point. This does bring up my other point. I'd like people to make UI toys in Clutter, so we can have something to mash between our fingers, something we can use and interact with to define the features we need in a new orbiter..But I've already gone over this repeatedly, with just about everybody missing the point...
I have been looking at clutter and I am amazed at how abstracted it is and seemingly easy to use, at least the basic stuff.
The Touch Orbiter is at best an interim solution for the problem of moving orbiter to other systems where the C++ DCE library isn't available.
I agree with you. But until Orbiter is re-written without PPL constraints it is a solution that will be persued by many. But I also see that the touch orbiter interface looks like it could be extensible to permit a wide range of data transfer capabilities and provide orbiter like functionality rather that simple image display and x,y return. dce through http? or could hari's rpc code essentially enable that type of functionality? never mind, this is another topic and more code for me to read.
I mean it fellas, am I the only one smart enough to actually work on the Pluto bits of the code? Are you all totally chicken shit? It certainly seems that way. No. Let's not actually understand what we have, let's just put our fingers in our ears LA LA LA LA LA and work around it! Stop it. Roll up your sleeves, grow a sack, and actually dig in and understand what we have..Then, and only then, can we move forward.
Thom you are not the only one smart enough. But this brings me to my previous post. While I dream nightly about dce messages firing between devices and envision more devices interfacing with greater ease... We are not all as experienced as you are with development or with the many facets of this system. I have a lot of respect for you and your understanding of this system, and your commitment to the project, but you are aggressive, appear arrogant, act dictatorial, and belittle people too often for me to really want to commit to doing anything you ask or demand. I want you to be a leader not an bully. Just because I don't understand Orbiter as well as you do does not make me less worthy of an intelligent response. Thom I don't agree with what you do here all the time and you don't have to agree with what I do either but I'm trying to help make this system better. I put more time into learning this system then I really should and I didn't think constructive help and a push in the right direction was too much to ask towards helping to make auto-configuring more of a reality.
What I want most is for people to stop adding 'features'. Maybe an RC; maybe a release would be conceivable. There is a 'Do as I say and not as I do!' attitude from the core team and that's really unfortunate and counter-productive. Challenges for adding new features have been posted regularly since Beta was announced. Beta is about a year old and new features are still be added, an RC doesn't appear on the horizon. If the core devs won't abide by the declarations then open the damn thing up so others can put their features in too!@
My rant ends now. I will continue to do what I am able when I am able to.