Revision history [back]

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less done already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less done already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less done completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla have been reluctant to fully Open Source the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its core apps. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough must be closed source, that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition that requires a UI can be made without internal Sailfish support.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain only the core Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. the UI back-end, such as widget implementations, and so on. This part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.

Jolla I have been reluctant to fully Open Source edited this Question heavily to move clarifications and ideas previously presented in comments into the question itself.

Almost all of the Sailfish OS is Open Source. The exception is that Jolla has not made the UI portions of Sailfish and most of its the core apps. apps Open Source. This is understandable considering the ease with which Chinese manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, Open Source is the basis upon which Jolla stands, so a strategy that permits as much of Jolla to be Open Sourced as possible would give Jolla as much support as possible (both for coding and otherwise) from the Open Source community. At the same time, enough of the OS must be closed source, source so that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla at all. Right now the anything. Unfortunately the current choice of what is closed source basis is all of the GUI portions. Unfortunately that stifles Open Source growth tremendously, since no addition tremendously:

• No feature-addition that requires a UI change can be made done without internal Sailfish support.programming work from within the company Jolla itself; a very limited resource.
• Community coders do it for fun, and many consider the most fun parts to be the ones where you see immediate results. That usually means UI changes.
• When modifying an existing project, going in through the UI code is often one of the easiest ways to find the part of the code you are looking for. This is impossible without the UI source code.

I am hoping to find a way to remedy these problems, while still maintaining enough of Jolla's competitive barriers for business success.

I am suggesting that Jolla maintain limit the closed source portions to only the core Look & Feel implementation as closed source, i.e. the UI back-end, such as widget implementations, and so on. This That part of the UI changes much more slowly than application and OS UI and is more relatively slowly, or less completed already. At the same time, applications made for the Jolla will still be strongly connected to that Look & Feel (pulley menus all around, etc), meaning that a competitor can't just take all at least its interfaces do. Then, the user interaction portions of the Sailfish UI and the core apps or the OS UI for themselves without re-writing the UI anyway.are moved to a fully open development process.

The exact border between closed source portions and open source portions of the Sailfish UI would need to be thought carefully about. The idea is to keep enough of the UI back-end closed, so that all Open Source development still needs heavy dependencies on the closed part, while giving enough freedom to allow development of Sailfish as Open Source.

I have edited this Question heavily to move clarifications and ideas previously presented in comments into the question itself.

Almost all of the Sailfish OS is Open Source. The exception is that Jolla has not made the UI portions of Sailfish and most of the core apps Open Source. This is understandable considering the ease with which manufacturers would be able to cut out Jolla completely otherwise. There are other revenue sources they could have used, such as consulting and contract development, however, the choice that Jolla made is understandable to me.

I would like to propose a small tweak of this strategy. Clearly, enough of the OS must be closed source so that phone makers can't just take it all and not pay Jolla anything. Unfortunately the current choice of what is closed source stifles Open Source growth tremendously:

• No feature-addition that requires a UI change can be done without programming work from within the company Jolla itself; a very limited resource.
• Community coders do it for fun, and many consider the most fun parts to be the ones where you see immediate results. That usually means UI changes.
• When modifying an existing project, going in through the UI code is often one of the easiest ways to find the part of the code you are looking for. This is impossible without the UI source code.

I am hoping to find a way to remedy these problems, while still maintaining enough of Jolla's competitive barriers for business success.

I am suggesting that Jolla limit the closed source portions to only the UI back-end, such as widget implementations, and so on. That part of the UI changes relatively slowly, or at least its interfaces do. Then, the user interaction portions of the Sailfish UI and the core apps are moved to a fully open development process.

The exact border between closed source portions and open source portions of the Sailfish UI would need to be thought carefully about. The idea is to keep enough of the UI back-end closed, so that all Open Source development still needs heavy dependencies on the closed part, while giving enough freedom to allow development of Sailfish as Open Source.