[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-panel-devel
Subject:    Re: KDE architecture diagram
From:       Aurélien_Gâteau <agateau () kde ! org>
Date:       2012-06-08 13:49:07
Message-ID: 1590033.6v8x133ZYO () trinity
[Download RAW message or body]

Le vendredi 8 juin 2012 15:07:17 Aaron J. Seigo a =E9crit :

> ok.. let's try to define that then. i'll offer what i see as a product, as
> then perhaps you can do the same and we can compare and hopefully
> understand each other better.
> =

> Product: a finished whole that is presented in a form that is useful to t=
he
> intended audience.
> =

> using that as a starting point, then to me the Linux kernel is a product
> delivered in a useful form to OS and hardware vendors; they then use the
> Linux kernel to make products useful to end users.
> =

> the Linux kernel is very different from kernels before it (and even many
> today). prior to the Linux kernel, we had operating systems "for servers"=
 or
> "for desktops" or "for mobile". hardware evolved and new thinking emerged
> and "Linux" is now a product that services super computers, servers,
> desktops, mobile, embedded, etc. as a hardware spectrum. there are deltas
> in the code for each target, but it's one product.
> =

> Plasma is similar. we deliver a UX in form useful for OS and hardware
> vendors; they use it to make products useful to end users.
> =

> Plasma is different from other workspace UX frameworks before it (and even
> many today). prior to Plasma, we have workspaces that are "for desktops"
> and "for phones" and "for PDAs" and "for tablets". hardware has evolved a=
nd
> our new thinking is that the workspace product should service workstation=
s,
> desktops, tablets, set top boxes, IVI, phones, etc. there are deltas in t=
he
> code for each target, but Plasma is one product.
> =

> Desktop, Netbook, Active and whatever else we add to it in the future
> extends this product with different device and use case targets. this is
> analogous to the arch trees in the Linux kernel.

My definition is indeed different. To me, Plasma Desktop, Plasma Netbook an=
d =

Plasma Active are three products, which are all built on top of a shared se=
t =

of components and applets.

As a user, my system is running either the Desktop, Netbook or Active produ=
ct. =

I can switch from one to another as I want.

To me, Plasma is an umbrella term which groups together the shells, the =

applets and the components.

This is how I see it could match with the Linux analogy:

- Plasma Active is the Android kernel, Plasma Desktop is the kernel shipped=
 by =

my distro.

They share a lot of code: Plasma Active and Desktop through dynamic librari=
es, =

the Android and distro kernels by building from (mostly) the same source tr=
ee.

They are also very different: Plasma shells through different binaries whic=
h =

make different use of the Plasma components, kernels through compilation =

options and different patchsets.

- A Plasma applet is a kernel module, some are developed in-tree, others ar=
e =

out-of-tree.
The Linux situation here further reinforces the fact that different kernels=
 are =

different products: Say you have a TI ARM board. If you build your own kern=
el =

for it, and a few modules. If you switch back to the kernel provided by TI, =

there is no chance for you to load any module built for your kernel: TI tak=
es =

the Linux kernel and creates a different product out of it.

- Plasma is the kernel, plus all modules, plus the low level plumbing =

libraries used to communicate with user-space.

> > But this discussion is going nowhere so let's end it.
> =

> how can we come to a common undestanding if we don't discuss?
> if we don't come to a common understanding, how can we succeed?
> =

> it's worth it.

Time will tell.

Aur=E9lien
_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]