[Tizen General] Tizen Community pages
bob at summerwill.net
Mon Jun 22 21:41:44 GMT 2015
Corrected JD Choi e-mail address
On Jun 22, 2015 2:27 AM, "Bob Summerwill" <bob at summerwill.net> wrote:
> I would like to propose that we take Brian Warner's move from the Linux
> Foundation to Samsung as the signal for reconsidering the Tizen Project as
> a whole.
> ** The Emperor has no clothes. **
> The current "Tizen community" setup is transparently "community threater"
> rather than being a real community model. The web forums are pointless
> ghost-towns. Even the mailing lists usually yield little in the way of
> useful engagement.
> The root cause of this is obvious, though unspeakable expect to the
> brave/stupid few like myself who are not dependent on Samsung financially.
> Tizen is now a Samsung project in every way which is meaningful. The
> Linux Foundation have little role. The Tizen Association are now almost
> entirely indistinguishable from Samsung.
> Intel have delivered on what was seemingly a contractual obligation to
> ship Tizen IVI 3.0, by paying Eurogicial to do that work, and now have
> seemingly existed stage left. Will they ever announce that they are no
> longer working on Tizen? Maybe in months and months time, or maybe never.
> I doubt they will want to be publicly seen as dumping a Mobile Linux
> project AGAIN after MeeGo, but that appears to be exactly what they have
> done. Tizen didn't work out the way they wanted. Nobody seems to have
> any interest in x86 chips for mobile, and they can get x86 sales for IoT
> without Tizen, so what is left for them in Tizen? Nothing.
> So Tizen is in a shambles in terms of the "official plan". It has been
> operating in a state of little integrity for a long, long time, as I first
> noted back in August 2014 -
> - to no official response. When your Open Source project cannot even be
> bothered to muster an official response to somebody stating publicly that
> your project is "Broken", I think that speaks volumes in itself. Almost
> on the same day that I was persuaded to have Kitsilano Software join the
> Tizen Association (
> the Tizen Project yet again kicked the community in the teeth with the
> silent murder of OSP between 2.3 Alpha and 2.3 Beta, showing complete
> contempt for semantic versioning and for partners and the community, by
> breaking all existing native apps.
> The unspeakable root cause of all of this is that Samsung run the Tizen
> show from behind closed doors. The promise of Tizen open governance which
> was announced in December 2013 (so, a full 19 months ago) -
> http://www.slideshare.net/SamsungOSG/tizen-open-governance-model - is
> still just that. A promise. Because the open governance was always ONLY
> for Tizen 3.x, not for the ongoing work on Tizen 2.x which is 100% of the
> commercially relevant life of the Tizen platform. Everything which is a
> real commercial Tizen product has been made by Samsung. All of them are
> on Tizen 2.x - even the forthcoming Gear A smartwatch. There is effort
> being applied by Samsung developers on Tizen 3.x profiles, but even now,
> there is no public commitment or timelines for Tizen 3.x product to be
> shipped by Samsung.
> Again, the unspeakable but obvious solution to all of this is very simple.
> To speak the truth. Tizen is OBVIOUSLY a Samsung project. Perhaps
> that wasn't the original plan. We all wanted this to be a collaborative
> project with many sponsors, spanning hardware manufacturers, telcos,
> software companies, etc. Like desktop Linux. That didn't work out, and
> now it is effectively just SLP again. Even the Bada part got killed.
> That is fine. Let's call it like it is. SLP is not a bad thing.
> So we're now in a position where Tizen is really just SLP again. It's a
> Samsung Linux project, working in a manner which is nearly identical to
> Android. Samsung does all the work behind closed doors, and does source
> drops at release points. You can take those releases and fork them and do
> what you want, but that's about it. Even that didn't used to be possible
> for Tizen when it was under Flora licensing, but everything useful in Tizen
> is Apache licensed too now, so that is now possible. RzR and Leon and
> others are showing the value in Tizen with their baseboard projects, though
> that is against the Tizen 3.0 zombie codebase.
> Tizen doesn't have to be a Linux Foundation project to be valuable.
> Samsung are driving. That is fine. They should remove the project from
> the Linux Foundation and run it themselves, through the Samsung Open Source
> Center. I hope that is the plan, and that is why Brian is moving to
> Samsung. With Brian at Samsung, a real Tizen community can be built with
> that project/community interface rightly being at Samsung, rather than in
> the weird Linux Foundation / Tizen Association / Tizen Steering Group /
> Samsung / Intel soup which has been the official line to this point.
> Tizen needs to just be a Samsung open source project. If Samsung are
> lacking in integrity then it will continue to be developed on the Tizen 2.x
> codeline forever (behind the castle walls), so that Samsung can avoid the
> open governance which was promised 19 months ago while saying that they
> never broken any promises because that governance was only for Tizen 3.x
> and they are not shipping any Tizen 3.x products. If Samsung really
> want Tizen to be anything other than "Samsung's Android" then they will
> switch to that open governance model for Tizen 2.x, or start shipping
> products based on Tizen 3.x. Like Smart TVs for 2016, and for the next
> Gear after Gear A, and for the Z2/Z3 mobile, etc. Or, if there is a long
> lead time for that switchover then to actually announce their plans for
> that switchover.
> So ... that would be my plea and recommendation. Please can the Tizen
> leadership start speaking the truth? Please can we all be honest and
> acknowledge that Tizen is a Samsung project? No more, no less. Maybe
> that wasn't the original plan, but it is a reality, and has been for many
> months or even years. The Linux Foundation needs to disengage. The
> Tizen Association needs to die. The Tizen Steering Committee needs to be
> disbanded. Samsung needs to be responsible for community engagement.
> Samsung needs to either honestly stand behind the less-than-ideal
> development model of behind closed doors development followed by source
> drops - just as Google does for Android - or commit to open governance for
> Tizen and actually do that. The Tizen 3.x codebase needs to be embraced
> by Samsung or killed.
> I am outside of the Tizen Project, but this reality is as clear as day to
> me. The cognitive dissonance has been jarring to me for nearly a year
> now. That is really unhealthy for everyone involved with the project.
> I cannot begin to imagine what it must be like to be working within that
> box. It's like an abusive relationship. There is a degree of Stockholm
> syndrome to stay within that broken system. The good news is that it is
> easy enough to fix this. But Samsung needs to lead that change, by
> acknowledging that there is a (very big) problem with the current setup,
> and by making that change.
> So there you go. That is what you call speaking your mind. I do it
> with the best long term intentions for everyone involved with the Tizen
> Project. Not just to be a prick. Because I am in a position to put
> these thoughts which many other people probably have every day, but they
> cannot articulate them, because to do so would be to bite the hand which
> feeds, and because they are afraid of the consequences of that. I am not.
> My life experiences have taught me that speaking truth to power can have
> very positive outcomes for everyone involved, and is a very rare trait -
> Go Tizen Go!
> Bob Summerwill
> Kitsilano Software
> http://bobsummerwill.com | http://kitsilanosoftware.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the General