On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 22:44 +0000, Xu, Martin wrote: > Patrick: > > > > I've also said it in https://bugs.tizen.org/jira/browse/TC-1972 but it is > > worth repeating here: NTB cannot be integrated like that unless it also > > supports PBAB transfers initiated by users. We have features in Tizen IVI > > depending on that (Modello/phoned, SyncEvolution). > > > > I asked about the PBAP API earlier [1] but got no response. As has become > > clear in TC-1972, PBAP will no longer work once TC-1972 is implemented and > > also isn't planned to be supported. I find that unacceptable and therefore > > have to put in a veto. I'll disagree and commit, of course, when the > > steering committee for Tizen decides otherwise. > As I said before, Currently, NTB's target is to be compatible with the > old Bluetooth framework.
You also have the requirement to work inside the existing Tizen system. That system relies on obexd's PBAP API because there isn't anything else. If integrating NTB into Tizen breaks that and there's no replacement, then someone needs to decide whether it can be integrated or stays out. My position is that it cannot be integrated when that breaks PBAP. Others may disagree of course. > Could you submit a patches to the ToDo file to add the task? Or you > can just file a new feature requirement at JIRA to track it. So NTB > guys can work on it. I don't know why "don't break the system" and PBAP (which was mentioned repeatedly on the list) needs to be tracked explicitly, but hey, why not. So here's https://bugs.tizen.org/jira/browse/PTF-235 -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
