I plan to have schedule tomorrow’s evening on the mailing list.
Of course be warned that we’re scheduling work on our-side only (Security-Manager, Cynara). We’re not directly responsible for Crosswalk using our API and schedule of that integration (even though we’ll help with that) – I understand that this integration has to be based on our schedule, obviously J BRs, cid:[email protected] Tomasz Świerczek Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics Office +48 22 377 95 59 Cell +48 503 135 021 [email protected] From: MECHIN Bruno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 11:36 AM To: Tomasz Swierczek; [email protected] Cc: Lukasz Wojciechowski Subject: Re: [Dev] Path of installed applications Tomasz, Thansk for your feedback . When are you be able to provide an accurate schedule. On our side we are dependant to your delivery, please consider that we need at least one month for integration part. Best regards, Cordialement Bruno MECHIN Tizen Vannes Le 14/10/2014 11:01, Tomasz Swierczek a écrit : Hi Mechin Bruno, With Rafal (Security-Manager) and Lukasz Wojciechowski (working on Cynara) we’ve just come up with task list, we’re working on schedule and we’d like to share it, of course. Making Crosswalk run with security integration to allow per-user/global app installation and launch is our goal for Common release in December. BRs, cid:[email protected] Tomasz Świerczek Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics Office +48 22 377 95 59 Cell +48 503 135 021 [email protected] From: Dev [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MECHIN Bruno Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 10:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Dev] Path of installed applications Hi All, As we have an agreement, It will be very useful to provide schedule to implementing, integrating and validating these feature. So, José, Rafal, would you mind providing us such schedule ? Best regards, Cordialement Bruno MECHIN Tizen project Le 13/10/2014 18:50, Rafał Krypa a écrit : On 2014-10-09 14:23, José Bollo wrote: Hi all, During recent F2F of the security team, we had long discussion about the packages that have more than one application. There are some more decisions to finalize this behaviour. One of this decision is to define the directory layout of the installation. There are several choices. Suppose a package whose id is PKG that have two applications whose ids inside the package are APP1 and APP2. The global ids of these two applications are GAPP1 and GPP2, they are computed on the base of the pairs (PKG, APP1) and (PKG, APP2), for example: PKG.APP1 or PKG:APP1. When installing the package into the directory APPSDIR, what structure will be chosen? 1) APPSDIR/PGK/APP1 and APPSDIR/PGK/APP2 or 2) APPSDIR/GAPP1 and APPSDIR/GAPP2 IIRC, the choice (2) was pointed out during F2F, but I'm not sure that it was really discussed. Do you confirm? What would be best? Hi, The final proposal was based on the choice [1]. The separate directory level for pkgId is necessary for file exchange between applications inside the package. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
