Open Amiga - Defining the Standards

[filson]

@Wayne

Thx alot for the support  :-)

[bloodline]

I seem to be answering most of the question around the web :-)

I would be happy to moderate  ;-)

[Rogue]

Thanks for taking the time out to give us your opinions on OpenAmiga.

I didn't give an opinion about it. I like the idea, but I think it is not going to work unless you settle for the smallest common featureset. This means that you neiter use AROS nor MorphOS nor AmigaOS to the extend that it could be used.

Sure, for some things it is going to work, but the Reaction <->MUI example is already a case where you run into trouble. Sure you could argue to use MUI in both cases since it is available for both,  but what if certain components are only available for MorphOS (AFAIK the MorphOS developers don't need to merge with the general code anymore, meaning that OS 4 has no access to their modifications).

The feature list on the web site indicates the "smallest common subset" thing already.  

(I wonder though why it needs to specify the executable format; with a certain certainity, a MorphOS ELF file will not run on AmigaOS, and an AmigaOS ELF file will not run on AROS. )

As you have said, these standards don't pose any threat to anyone.

No, I never claimed otherwise (It was Wayne that did claim Hyperion would). As I stated before, I am all for open standards - another reason why we have XML services integrated into AmigaOS.  Of course I don't speak on behalf of Amiga or Hyperion officially.

I wish those behind the effort best of luck. When AmigaOS 4 is done, all documentation for it will be available, and people will be free to use it to produce software for AmigaOS 4. I don't have a problem with the same software running under MorphOS or AROS (in fact while Hyperion never officially supported anything but AmigaOS, we did likewise not build anything into our programs to prevent them from running under MorphOS or Amithlon).

However, please also understand that we're not going to hold back with implementing new API's and system components for compatibility's sake. If we think that it will bring the platform forward, we'll go ahead and do it,

[System]

@Rogue,

I certainly have no interest in arguing with you.  I find it very interesting to get your input and hope that you speak for both Amiga Inc and Hyperion in your acceptance of the effort.  If the OpenAmiga effort can start and be unburdened by Amiga Inc trying to kill it as they have done with other community efforts in the past, I would consider that a monumental step forward.

That being said, I digress.  

I don't view this effort as wanting to impose any petty proprietary packages such as MUI or Reaction.  I would see a standards committee as providing concepts and ideas of how things should work, not forcing people to accept one particular product or another.  If anything, I would see them developing a wholly independent solution where necessary.

That's just me however, feel free to disagree.

[System]

Your bang on Wayne! :-D

Apps could be written that have AOS4/MorphOS/AROS specific extensions, but still compile and run on the other platforms.

Isn't this the Amiga way afterall? If a library doesn't exist, then fine, your app still works, it just doesn't use the added functionality that the extra library would have given it.

[Rogue]

Wayne wrote:
I find it very interesting to get your input and hope that you speak for both Amiga Inc and Hyperion in your acceptance of the effort.

I can't speak for either Hyperion nor Amiga, however, I think I can say that the production of software is in our own interest - after all we don't do an OS just for the OS' sake.

... by Amiga Inc trying to kill it as they have done with other community efforts in the past,

I think that AROS is still alive...

I don't view this effort as wanting to impose any petty proprietary packages such as MUI or Reaction.

The openamiga.tk homepage does exactly this: It lists MUI as a requirement.

But that is exactly one of the problems you face. If you look at the Linux world, many of the projects there that would be an easy port to the Amiga fail to be such an easy port because of the GUI system.

If you want to define an open amiga platform, you would need to start at a higher level, otherwise you do exactly this - select a few proprietary packages and declare them standard.

By all means, if you want to have an open standard, you have to abstract from the packages you have. You need to define an API layer that can be mapped to the specific API's of the systems you are targeting. The only item from the list that fits this is SDL. Anything else is choosing one package and making it standard.

In my opinion, what needs to be done is define an abstract API for handling user interfaces, audio, kernel services and file services, and implement this on the respective platforms. Anything else, and you'll drive yourself into a dead end.

f anything, I would see them developing a wholly independent solution where necessary.

Seems we fully agree here  :-)

[bloodline]

By all means, if you want to have an open standard, you have to abstract from the packages you have. You need to define an API layer that can be mapped to the specific API's of the systems you are targeting. The only item from the list that fits this is SDL. Anything else is choosing one package and making it standard

Ok, you have misunderstood, maybe, my reasons for choosing the systems I did.

Every API I listed had to forefill three requirements:
1. It is a commonly used API in the comunity.
2. It is available on every platform
3. A Free alternative must exist (if no native verison is available).

The only two that don't fit are OpenGL and SDL, these I added because I think they are very important, for the future.

It really was as simple as that... no politics, no jibes, no conspiricy... just simple logic.  :-)

[Ogy]

Being no coder but designer and musician who made his first steps using Amiga computers I wont be able to add anything usefull to this thread but:

Good luck guys!!!

This sort of unity is exactly what amiga comunity needs if we are to stop using wintel machines any time soon...

[Rogue]

It really was as simple as that... no politics, no jibes, no conspiricy... just simple logic.

Didn't want to imply anything else. Like I said, I doubt that it is possible to define a common standard on the component level you chose. These API's are already going separate ways, and the gap is going to widen. For a common platform, you need to aim at a higher level. SDL fits into the picture, because it is developed indenpendent of the OS it is ported to. The same needs to be done for other parts.

Only when you control the API can you ensure interoperability. This is why a program like GIMP can run on Windows and linux - because it is based on glib and gtk.

[bloodline]

Only when you control the API can you ensure interoperability. This is why a program like GIMP can run on Windows and linux - because it is based on glib and gtk.

Indeed, and I agree. But what we are defining here is not an attempt to contol the platform, but rather an attempt to identify the commonality of the existing OS solutions... Thus allowing the easy spread of software.

I would hope that in future the amiga community can decide what specification the openamiga platform should have, and it can be revised accordingly.

The problem is that we don't share the same view of the world with regard to this problem, and thus we don;t see the same solution  :-(

[System]

-edit-

REMOVED: MDMA IS HAVING A BAD DAY! TOO MANY PAINKILLERS ;-)

[bloodline]

Your pain killers sound great, I want some :-D

[System]

Crack a vertabrae in your back and i'm sure the hospital will give you some too! ;-)

[bloodline]

ok, will do ;-)

Actually my mate Steve broke his neck about 4 years ago and he claims the drugs they gave him for that were amasing..  :-o

[System]

The NHS are are wondeful organization! :-D

[gary_c]

amimonkey wrote:

@mdma
You asked if somebody could "Ask Fleecy"... doesn't mean that gary_C has an excuse to go off on one and generalise about the people who frequent amigaworld.net.

Well, mdma was also interested in the general reaction at amigaworld.net and since I had already posted there in a short thread about openamiga, I decided to write up a little summary of the opinions in that thread.

I don't think my generalization was wrong actually, and as a qualifier I pointed out that it was based on a small sample, but it was wrong to express the opinion in this thread if it gets people off-topic and upset. Sorry about that.

-- gary_c