On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 19:27 +0200, Rasmus Eneman wrote:
Having only a set of default services would be very limiting.
Even if a music background service could take streams to
support metronome-like apps, how about Spotify or Grooveshark?
They
Would it not be an idea to make a plugin based system. For instance if
someone wants to make a torrent downloader they'd make a plugin for the
download service to handle the connections, pieces, etc and then make a
front-end to initiate and monitor downloads, and change connection
settings. Same
Hi,
Am 25.10.2013 19:48, schrieb Thomas Voß:
One thing that strikes me: Instead of trying to solve the problem a
lot of won't work statements are made in this thread, going along
with a request for removing all of the lifecycle policies. And to be
clear: With strict policies in place, it is
Take part in anonymous survey about past and current cooperation between
companies and communities in open source mobile Linux projects (all
questions are optional):
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kHw7TFOlWTSyDDmNP0fPPuAt8zpCvRbbLsmX1Mqdmec/viewform
It takes only 5-20 minutes to fill. Expect
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Florian Will florian.w...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
Am 25.10.2013 19:48, schrieb Thomas Voß:
One thing that strikes me: Instead of trying to solve the problem a
lot of won't work statements are made in this thread, going along
with a request for removing all of
On 10/25/2013 08:48 PM, Thomas Voß wrote:
One thing that strikes me: Instead of trying to solve the problem a
lot of won't work statements are made in this thread, going along
with a request for removing all of the lifecycle policies. And to be
clear: With strict policies in place, it is
I think we are misunderstanding; I'm not saying that the user should be
asked (at install time or at run time) for granting a permission. There
would be a policy groups background_gps, background_music which the
app developer can declare in its manifest file. Then, if the application
is defocused
One simple add:
I do say background services a lot, however just letting apps run in the
background would basically be the same thing. That's a weigh between
simple code (portability?) and forcing developers to not do anything
graphical while in the background.
2013/10/27 Rasmus Eneman
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Alberto Mardegan
alberto.marde...@canonical.com wrote:
On 10/25/2013 08:48 PM, Thomas Voß wrote:
One thing that strikes me: Instead of trying to solve the problem a
lot of won't work statements are made in this thread, going along
with a request for removing
Hi Rick,
Am 27.10.2013 16:25, schrieb Rick Spencer:
This sounds kind of far fetched. Who would do something like this on
their phone?
More than 200k android users who downloaded the app that I described. I
don't think it's a phone! is a valid excuse for not allowing any CPU
intensive task in
10 matches
Mail list logo
