This raises a good distinction between type of criteria.
--Some are "minimum acceptance" in the sense that they must be met
(like Hildonization)
--others (like the two mentioned here) are metrics through which apps
can be quantitatively compared and that point out areas for improvement
I'm thinking of adding the list of criteria to each app in "the list"
of Mobile apps: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MobileAndEmbedded/
UserApplications.
Any objections or better ideas?
Kyle
On Oct 25, 2007, at 1:25 PM, GrueMaster wrote:
Low memory footprint. Some systems are being developed with 256M
total (~250M kernel memory after Video takes its chunk).
Low cpu utilization (extends battery life). Use powertop to test
applications with the acpi_cpufreq and cpufreq_ondemand drivers
loaded (these should be loaded by default - fixme) to see how often
your app requires the cpu to change state.
These are just a couple of ideas of the top of my head.
Tobin
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 12:39 -0400, Kyle Nitzsche wrote:
Hi,
We've been talking in Lexington about whether it would be helpful to
develop a list of criteria for assessing the status of an application
that has been added to Ubuntu Mobile Core.
The app might not be considered fully "mobilized" if items on the
list are not done.
Mobilization criteria might include:
--Hildonization
--UI works at 800x480
--UI works for finger touch (no small buttons)
--Set up for translation
--Consistent with theme framework
--More?
Thoughts?
Kyle
-- Tobin Davis
Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem
in relation to a bigger problem.
-- P.D. Ouspensky
--
Ubuntu-mobile mailing list
[email protected]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-mobile
