• Announcements

    • Reminder - MoDaCo position on illegal content   07/30/15

      ILLEGAL CONTENT I'd like to just reaffirm MoDaCo's position regarding piracy and illegal content in the light of some recent questions / postings. Posts will be censored by myself or my moderation team if the contain or link to: Illegal / pirated / cracked software or sites that host such softwareNintendo emulators / ROMs or sites hosting them (in light of Nintendo's legal stance)CUSTOM ROMS You may discuss and post links to custom device ROMs on MoDaCo, provided the following rules are adhered to: ROMs must not contain any illegal 3rd party software (this includes trial versions included without permission)ROMs must give full credit to the original authorISSUES If you have any issues with this policy, please contact PaulOBrien directly via PM.
    • Reminder: Selling items on the forum directly is not allowed   07/30/15

      Please note that selling items on the forum directly is not allowed by the forum rules. There is a forum for eBay auctions whereby you can list the items on eBay and link to them there. This is the ONLY forum for this type of activity. You may also advertise links to the eBay forum in your signature. Please note that selling directly in contravention of these rules will result in a warning / suspension / ban.

Can all devs join forces?

47 posts in this topic

Posted

only if they don't supply the sources when asked to...

but I agree at github is essential

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i think the current development process works well. everybody works on their own thing. if something is good, the feature is also adopted by other developers so in the end all the good features should make it into up to date packages.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Who's "them" you refer to? The ROM makers..

why is there no github tree for the sources anywhere... this, is where github comes in, have the main trunk for 2.6.32, let the rom makers upload the patches and fixes available for anyone....they should be available for anyone to use...? why holding on to it and not distribute them and expected to be asked?

Distributing a ROM without the sources....

Surely that is a breach of the GPL

:lol:

I honestly think you're the first to ask.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I honestly think you're the first to ask.

That a good or bad thing? :lol:

Edited by t0mm13b
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

what about a collective rom with a kitchen, so u can choose the features? so everyone can have their cake and eat it

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

what about a collective rom with a kitchen, so u can choose the features? so everyone can have their cake and eat it

It is not about ROMs tandeh, you have not been reading the thread throughout....

It is about kernel sources... stick to that.... without a kernel there'd be no ROM...

The point and the gist of it all, is this, there's no kernel sources with patches/fixes publicly available, there's no public repository for devs to pull down and fine tune, tweak it (and no, you should not have to ask for it) and its clearly a breach of the GPL....

I have said it in previous postings, why the shroud of secrecy? that is not the spirit of Open Source, that is shutting out and contravening the GPL by distributing a binary with no sources...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not sure what you think we get upto..

the kernel source is available on ZTE's website... KK has made public his video fixes.. I think if you read the thread he's also made public his over-clocking stuff...

someone on here (I forget the name) created a github of the kernel sources and the fixes....

there's no secrecy in the kernel at all

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

forgive me for this but to all who think its a huge secret and all with rom development its not, if your not sure how to compile a kernal, dont worry because the very nice devs have already done it for you, simply take the rom unzip it and there you go a raw rom ready to work on, now you can add or take away things or update library files ect, then once your finished zip it all back up and see if it works, there are tools like apk manager for editing apk files, but you do need to learn about signing apks or not in the case of sytem files, trust me play around and you to can create a custom rom, you only need to learn building a kernal if you really want to. the editing of kernals is not for the faint hearted if you choose that path and i will almost guarentee it will no doubt go wrong for you a few times.

at present we have 3 good kernal builds

2.1 stock

2.2 jellyfish

2.2 chinese

take your pick which is to be your base and then play around, you will soon learn what does what and what does not. the devs here are very good at releasing fixes updates ect, new rils ect

just remember if your a programmer with some experience then editing the source is for you and yeah go for it and tell the world what you have done, but if you not just use the compiled roms as your bases.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

forgive me for this but to all who think its a huge secret and all with rom development its not, if your not sure how to compile a kernal, dont worry because the very nice devs have already done it for you, simply take the rom unzip it and there you go a raw rom ready to work on, now you can add or take away things or update library files ect, then once your finished zip it all back up and see if it works, there are tools like apk manager for editing apk files, but you do need to learn about signing apks or not in the case of sytem files, trust me play around and you to can create a custom rom, you only need to learn building a kernal if you really want to. the editing of kernals is not for the faint hearted if you choose that path and i will almost guarentee it will no doubt go wrong for you a few times.

at present we have 3 good kernal builds

2.1 stock

2.2 jellyfish

2.2 chinese

take your pick which is to be your base and then play around, you will soon learn what does what and what does not. the devs here are very good at releasing fixes updates ect, new rils ect

just remember if your a programmer with some experience then editing the source is for you and yeah go for it and tell the world what you have done, but if you not just use the compiled roms as your bases.

... :lol: ...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not sure what you think we get upto..

the kernel source is available on ZTE's website... KK has made public his video fixes.. I think if you read the thread he's also made public his over-clocking stuff...

someone on here (I forget the name) created a github of the kernel sources and the fixes....

there's no secrecy in the kernel at all

Seb, its great to learn that everything seems to have been been brought fully up-to-date in the last 10 days ...

I believe that someone (In not good with names) had created a github of the 3(4) versions of the kernel source we got from ZTE, I think they might also of added some of the previous fixes needed to get it to compile... tho I just found out that KK has a different set of fixes that lets it work with TFT screens....

Are you now using the unified kernel github?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It would have been so good to get a properly unified kernel source tree, so that for example Andorko's upcoming FM RDS patch could be rolled into everyone's roms, and similarly, if a fix is found for the strangenesses of the 'LEAD' tft screen, that too could be painlessly picked up by anyone and everyone compiling a Kernel.

Perhaps beyond that, something could be done around an AOSP system setup.

As kallt_kaffe is currently discovering, that too has big steps in its learning curve, where individuals have had to solve things for themselves and re-invent wheels.

And the irony is that entry-level dev's would have at least as much to gain as the elite.

/sigh

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

@XenoPod, @Rottman,

Look, let's keep this thread strictly professional, if you want to trade insults, do it via pm's and not to jam up this thread - this thread is about far more than just about "unprofessional" conduct.

Transparency is the key here, there's a jvaughan's github, who's using it?

@OhDougal!

I am in agreement with your comments and yes it is a sad day, we should all be able to help each other to put patches, fixes and show ZTE what and how it should be done. Unfortunately, the reality lies elsewhere, all very fine for ZTE to bring out the sources, but there's a lot missing, of course, if ZTE does not wish to disclose the sources to their proprietary drivers at their discretion, fine, we can work together and find a way to get it to work - take the ril layer for example... what is worrying me about this whole thread is there's no single tree to work from, and transparency for the kernel sources.

Sure, one can be shifty on it and say "Oh, I cannot remember the name of so-and-so and submitted the patches..." etc and be vague on the details, etc, that's not going to help unify and to work together is it?

Each of the ROM's have their own plus'es and minus'es, one kernel is overclocked, another isn't, I do know that ZTE-BLADE has the overclocking stuff used by Japanese Jellyfish, it's just seems disparate that there's different trees... there's r3pak's who has gingerbread stuff as well....against the same kernel version...

Even writing a tutorial put together on how to recompile the kernel was helpful to others (I hope!) to be able to experiment for themselves....

I am all for transparency, and to help out in any way I can.... no sniping or snarky comments please... leave that at home!

So what you say? Work together yeah?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

that's what the patches are for. someone already started collecting the different fixes on one thread.

unfortunately, many changes are not kernel patches and so can't be simply merged into the github.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This is interesting... I happened to stumble on this...

Read this linky here...

:lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

that's what the patches are for. someone already started collecting the different fixes on one thread.

unfortunately, many changes are not kernel patches and so can't be simply merged into the github.

While I haven't done any android kernel development yet (!), let me voice some opinions about this situation.

It's clear that the current developers are competent and productive people and think about the best interests of the community. Having an up-to-date central repository for development efforts so far is hopefully only a matter of time. While it doesn't necessarily improve the productivity of the currently working developers significantly, a central place for the code lowers the barrier of entry for new developers. It's also worth noting that since people are doing their work voluntarily, they may quit their effort at any time. I certainly do not wish this to happen, but having the code publicly available means that it takes less work to "finalize" your work, it's already there for us to improve. It also decreases the unnecessary communication between the developers and users asking for the latest sources (something that GPL allows them to do).

Having a single tree might be a bit problematic with all the non-compatible addons and features. Also because of proprietary components which won't necessarily allow redistribution. OTOH having all patches so far in a single place seems better than in these forums, at least it's a good first step. For example I'm mostly interesting in the Jellyfish "distribution" and it already contains 160 pages of discussion. Mostly the same questions for noob users doing their first flashing attempt.

Another thing worth considering is a FAQ for all ROMs. This would work best if it was a wiki, to take away the burden from developers and it would also let people less familiar with the platform collaborate, gradually improving their knowledge. It's a great path for new developers to begin with technical questions, helping with the FAQ wiki, building the instructions and scripts for ROM development and finally contributing with new ROMs.

Third important tool would be an issue tracker. Those are also freely available via e.g. github. I've noticed several duplicates in the threads and some unresolved issues. Since managing these currently basically means going through all the posts in the threads, the help would be enormous.

Edited by miasma
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This is interesting... I happened to stumble on this...

Read this linky here...

:lol:

would that ever be implemented on Modaco though, as Paul would have to give his sources for the roms he develops, and the kernel changes he has implemented.

does he do that, as I notice he also posts on XDA, his Galaxy Tab MCK and MCR comes to mind, I cant remember seeing any sources posted.

read this here

Edited by hecatae
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

would that ever be implemented on Modaco though, as Paul would have to give his sources for the roms he develops, and the kernel changes he has implemented.

does he do that, as I notice he also posts on XDA, his Galaxy Tab MCK and MCR comes to mind, I cant remember seeing any sources posted.

read this here

He doesn't have to post his sources but if he doesn't, then he has to provide them upon request to all third parties.

I believe he does post his soucres on a public git repo "somewhere out there"

If he distributes GPL software he should inform recipients of their GPL rights at point of distribution, and for his convenience which git repo and which commit/branch he used.

I am sure any omission is not deliberate, not that it is an excuse.

Edited by samjam
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This is interesting... I happened to stumble on this...

Read this linky here...

:lol:

While I realize that I have only outlined a small portion of the GNU GPL, the bottom line here is that the COMPLETE and WORKING kernel source that was MODIFIED by anyone MUST be provided to the community, for any version of publicly released software.

It applies to everyone.

However horrible the hacks, however much 'magic' it adds to the aura, the source CANNOT be withheld if the compiled code is publicly released.

No exceptions.

The exact same rules apply to ZTE and freelance dev's.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Right I've tidied up this thread

I've deleted comments that were offensive to some and edited out comments/quotes from some other posts

Apologies to those that may think I just edited out quotes from their post, I did it to every comment that was relative.

If there is any derogatory comments made by anyone about another poster then action will be taken.

We won't all see eye to eye with each other 100% of the time and we all will have different ideas but

PLEASE keep the forum friendly and let's try and get on with each other.

now can we please keep it on topic :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He doesn't have to post his sources but if he doesn't, then he has to provide them upon request to all third parties.

I believe he does post his soucres on a public git repo "somewhere out there"

If he distributes GPL software he should inform recipients of their GPL rights at point of distribution, and for his convenience which git repo and which commit/branch he used.

I am sure any omission is not deliberate, not that it is an excuse.

wasn't saying it is deliberate, just curious

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i will also make a suggestion for those who feel that not everything is being put into a shared kernel: why not help do this? you don't need to be a developer to ask for the patches from others and then commit them yourself to a git repository.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

From the thread on Seb's new DX rom ...

Isn't the Google Account activation problem something that Paul fixed in an early alpha of his 2.2? Was it something in the framework?

Edit: the only mention by Paul that I could find (anyone know what the fix was?)

Anyone ???

Edited by oh!dougal
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

MoDaCo is part of the MoDaCo.network, © Paul O'Brien 2002-2015. MoDaCo uses IntelliTxt technology.