W dniu 08.10.2015 o 12:48, Simon Fels pisze: > On 08.10.2015 12:16, Michał Sawicz wrote: >> W dniu 08.10.2015 o 11:54, Michael Zanetti pisze: >>> Not sure if the Android layer is really the place to go. What happens >>> when we run on an x86 based tablet which doesn't have the Android bits? >>> Will that always have the DMI interface instead? > > x86 based tablets should have the DMI interface. > >> I agree, we need to plan for not having Android around. IMO we should >> have a device file shipped, as you said, in the device tarball, that >> configures the device. The user should be able to easily override things >> stored there (for development purposes or other). > > Sounds good and it looks like we already have a file for this: > > $ cat /etc/ubuntu-touch-session.d/android.conf > GRID_UNIT_PX=17 > QTWEBKIT_DPR=2.0 > > So what about just extending this one which comes either from the device > tarball (krillin, arale) or from the ubuntu-touch-session package (flo, > mako)?
Longer-term I think we should go away from putting it all in environment (which is where they end up with) and use a richer file format (.ini, .json, .yaml seems to be a choice often these days). Until then, I'm fine with putting it there. >> Priority should be: >> - user override >> - device tarball >> - auto-detected fallback > > Sure. Where a user override exists then this one should be applied > first. In the case of the Bluetooth device class the user doesn't have > any control over this. Is there a reason why we would disallow overriding this? We'll have devices that can't easily be categorized as one (I mean, is a 10" tablet with GSM a phone or a tablet?). -- Michał Sawicz <[email protected]> Canonical Ltd.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
