Cool. It looks like a Prioritised To-Do list now ;) Al.
P.S. I thought you were trying to ease back on weekend work JBQ :). -- * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * ====== Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jean-Baptiste Queru Sent: 16 August 2009 17:15 To: [email protected] Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Why Google Android is open source? To make it easier for everyone to be able to easily see the most "popular" (unpopular?) issues, I've made "sort by stars" the default. Just go to http://b.android.com/ to see them. JBQ On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:07 AM, Al Sutton<[email protected]> wrote: > Switch b.android.com to Grid view, then change the Rows setting from none to > "Stars", then click update. > > > > Top starred bug is WPA2-Enterprise with EAP extensions, apps on SD is number > 2 :) > > > > Al. > > > > -- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Disconnect > Sent: 12 August 2009 13:00 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Why Google Android is open source? > > > > Just out of curiosity, how do you get the bugtracker to sort by stars? (Or, > more to the point, where's that list? I'm wondering what else is sitting on > it.) > > (And if its 'apps on sd', as you imply, I haven't seen any patches that have > associated security and UI pieces. symlinks aren't a patch, they're a hack > :) .. That is one where, like multitouch, they said "propose it and we'll > discuss it; code it and we'll review it; test it and we'll include it". And > ISTR San spelled out most of the requirements - I'm sure we can get a > new/updated list in the process of 'propose it' if the SNR is decent > enough.) > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Eric F <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would have to say given that the 6th most starred issue in the > Google Android's bug database had a perfectly working patch submitted > from the community and it's been stated that it won't possibly be > included even in eclair, Android isn't what most of us think of when > we think of an open source project. > > I just hope the attitude of "stop asking for something and submit a > patch" will stop. Patch or no, it doesn't matter. There's no community > involvement at the platform level. > > I think it's only a matter of time as Google ignores the Apps on SD > card feature until a different Android repository becomes the leading > Android distribution. This could have a dire impact on the entire > ecosystem with diverging versions of the platform and incompatible > SDKs. I really didn't think so before, thinking that the G1 was just a > rushed product and nobody communicated enough to determine that 256MB > ROM doesn't cut it. But given that every phone announced except the > galaxy has 512MB or less ROM, it seems nobody cares. > > On Aug 10, 9:26 pm, David Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Riyaz <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Google wants everyone to depend on them ???? >> >> Not really, otherwise there wouldn't be any reason to even try the >> open-source thing. >> >> The reason why everything is not entirely developed in the open source >> tree >> are multiple, but basically boil down to the fact that product development >> has a much higher priority at the moment than building a strong and pure >> open-source community for the platform. >> >> However, the latter is still a goal that we strive to achieve, and be sure >> we will get there at some point. For example, the open-source donut branch >> really reflect the state of our current sources, with a slight delay >> compared to the internal tree. >> >> Also; I know a couple of manufacturers that are using the open-source >> Cupcake >> sources to build real products; so I disagree with Disconnect's assumption >> that the open-source tree is "totally useless" :-). >> >> >> >> > On Aug 10, 9:10 pm, Disconnect <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Evidently it won't, thats why they decided to do occasional code dumps >> > and >> > > leave the open source project totally useless to developers. >> > >> > >> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/msg/7e9d83aa0b08cd39(and<http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/msg/7e9d83aa0b08cd39%...> > >> > > associated thread) >> >> > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Riyaz <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> > > > Hi all, >> >> > > > Just wanted to know of curiosity, >> >> > > > Why Google released Android as Open Source ? >> >> > > > or in other words How open sourcing Android will help Google? > > > > > -- Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google. Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further warning. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
