technical spec for the workstation up for review

[Matthias Clasen]

On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 13:42 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:

> I think it's okay for drafts / initial versions to look like this, and then
> we can eventually collapse parts down to "#include base" or "#include foo
> from base" / "include base except bar".

So, my view on this is that you can't specify a product 'with the core
missing'. We have to write up how we want it all to work, from the
kernel up. The other product WGs should do the same. And if the base WG
managed to extract a common core out of that, more power to them.

But I don't think we can say: 

'Our product is going to work like this ...
 and it is going to have these characteristics ...
 and it is going to be built on top of this unknown core that
 we have very little influence over or insight into how it works.'