Patrick: > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick Ohly [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 0:31 > To: Xu, Martin > Cc: Kis, Zoltan; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Dev] discuss on NTB > > On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 22:51 +0000, Xu, Martin wrote: > > Hi Kis: > > Thanks for your comments on NTB, and in general, we have same opinions > from technology. > > Please see my comments. > > > The bigger problem is that CAPI [1] does not support the features > > > promised in the architecture slides [2], so it is impossible to be > > > used in Crosswalk extensions using PBAP and MAP for instance. > > > Instead we need to directly use BlueZ, and that is what I am doing now. > > Please tell me detail what is the features promised in CAPI and not > supported? > > And what is the detail about why you can't use PBAP and MAP? > > Because PBAP is not part of the CAPI? See also my email from October 29th > that no-one replied to: > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.tizen.devel/4677 Yes, CAPI does not include that part. And we also did not claimed that we currently support the profile in the NTB WiKi. I have already said in my previous mail. I do know there are a lot of issues in CAPI, and we also suggested Samsung to redefine and optimize CAPI. But that was strongly rejected by Samsung. So the conclusion is that we must implement and support current existing Bluetooth CAPI. And then next step we will redefine, add and optimize the CAPI. So if you find any other gaps in CAPI, please put it in WiKI, we can propose to Samsung and work on it together, please. > > > So here I want to introduce another design goal of NTB: > > All the Bluetooth service should go through the unified interface. Of > > course Best option is to use BlueZ dbus interface. But during past 6 > > years working on Comms projects like (BlueZ/ConnMan/oFono). I got to know > that it is not easy to use Dbus. > > That may have been your experience. I'd rather use a D-Bus API directly > instead of having to go through some "simplified" layer on top which > prevents doing all the things that can be done with the underlying API. That not only form my own experience, I use D-BUS for a long time, I have a lot of D-Bus experience. I can handle it well. I am just from the normal developers that do not know D-Bus detail. Please do not just from your own experience. That are also a lot developers not know Dbus operation very well. > > > I do not know what is your meaning of full functionality support in CAPI? > > > > From the wiki page you should know that we have passed TCT test pass > > rate 98.13%(322 test case and 314 passed) > > You pass the tests that Samsung defined for the functionality that was need > for the Mobile profile. The tests for the missing functionality haven't been > written, so arguing based on pass rates is pretty pointless.
I can't understand why working on Tizen system, TCT(Tizen Compatible Test) is not important?? Thanks! _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
