Just a suggestion: add a configurable option "Run when minimized" with a notice that it will consume device power/CPU if it's enabled. Maybe, this will satisfy Harbour QA.
On 10/01/14 10:01, Martin Windolph wrote: > Hi, > > another point for me is a possibility to contact the tester. > A prior rejection reason for an update of my game "Morzyn" was a missing > menu button (that was absolutely ok, because it leads to bad usability, > so I included one), my last rejection reason was battery consumption > when minimizing while the AI players do their move. > This is intended behaviour, but my game was rejected because it consumes > 3%-10% CPU while the AI players move (round-based) and the game is > minimized (measured by top). When the game waits for the players move, I > don't see it in "top". I love to finish my move, switch to my mail > folders or read facebook messages while the other 6 AI players make > their move. > Another point is that in future I want to include network gaming. > Therefore I also want it to run in background. The great thing of > Sailfish OS is that one can simply close an app like in the good old > desktop days, if you don't want it to consume power. > So now I have no idea how to react on this and just did nothing, because > I also have desktop and Android versions to take care of. But I'm not > happy that the few users of Morzyn can't profit from the fixes of the > update and have to deal with the version in store. > > Martin > >> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:57:50 +0100 >> From: a...@mecadu.org >> To: devel@lists.sailfishos.org >> Subject: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process... >> > Hi, > > currently, the Harbour QA process is quite frustrating, as problems > are reported one after the other, with a delay of several days > inbetween... reminds me of the old time cobol compilators! > > It would be cool if the efforts made by the developper to provide free > native application were a bit more considered. > > Ok, I'm talking out of frustration, but I had my app rejected first > because of naming conventions of the app itself (I didn't properly > read the FAQ, but it is not stated either in the app submission page > of Harbour), delay of 7 days, then because of rmp file naming > convention (which I did not find clearly stated except in the > rejection notification - 5 more days). Now I am waiting for next step > (2 days for now...) > > I understand this is a lot of work, but what I suggest is : > - more controls and more information in the app submission page > (testing the naming conventions of at least the files seems trivial) > - when doing QA, report all problems at once, not just the first one > - maybe provide a QA tool so that developpers could do this job and > let jolla teams concentrate on real QA (power consumption, security > checks, ...) > > Hope this does not sound too demanding... > > Best regards, > Franck >> _______________________________________________ >> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list > > > _______________________________________________ > SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list > -- With best regards, Olekii Serdiuk
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
