Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Martin Windolph]

Hi,


I tried out Davids QtMultimedia workaround, but that doesn't help while I have 
found other issues with sound after digging a bit deeper, not only the volume 
problem with the Audio element. 
Btw. if I just remove the fading effect behaviour from my title music, the 
system volume isn't changed as the volume of all the Audio elements is never 
changed then and they also use the correct systems volume. 



But I decided to remove all audio in Morzyn for Sailfish this weekend until 
there is a QtMultimedia fix.


I've found the following additional issues (maybe they are all related, but I 
want to summarize the symptoms here):


1. Using the Audio element with mp3-Sounds, every time I play a sound when a 
creature attacks, the game lags a few frames, (doesn't happen on desktop and 
weaker Androids)
2. short sounds <12kb don't play at all, maybe because of:
3. I get a few warnings like this on app start:
[W] QGstreamerPlayerSession::pause:828 - GStreamer; Unable to pause - 
"file:///usr/share/harbour-morzyn/qml/sounds/meleemiss01.mp3"


I converted them to wav and the gstreamer warnings disappeared and I heard the 
sounds, but the lags were still there.


So now with my wav files I tried the "SoundEffect"-Element, which solved the 
lags...great!, but:


4. all SoundEffects run with 100% volume, no matter what system volume is set 
to (this works for “Audio” elements if you don’t change their own volume).


I hope this helps a bit to fix QtMultimedia.


br and have a nice weekend
Martin






Von: Reto Zingg
Gesendet: ‎Freitag‎, ‎10‎. ‎Januar‎ ‎2014 ‎15‎:‎06
An: Sailfish OS Developers





Hi,

On 10.01.2014 15:56, Martin Windolph wrote:
> Hi,
>
> oh, thanks for the information and sorry then for hijacking this thread.
> I thought that it was just an assumption that Audio was the reason.
>
> How can I find out if it's audio that is preventing suspend mode
> (emulator or device)?
>
> So Audio output seems to be really a problem in Sailfish OS. I'm using
> the QML "Audio" Element of QtMultimedia. Isn't it supported? I use Audio

as Robin wrote in 
https://together.jolla.com/question/421/qaudiooutput-isnt-integrated-with-system-volume-and-libresource-like-qmediaplayer/#post-id-6991
 
this combination is an issue at the moment.

But David found a workaround for that at least for his application, 
which passed store QA.

checkout his main.qml from:

https://build.merproject.org/package/files?package=screenshot&project=home%3Albt%3Asailfishos

he does something like:

ffmpeg -ar 48000 -t 0.1 -f s16le -acodec pcm_s16le -ac 2 -i /dev/zero 
-acodec copy noSound.wav

ApplicationWindow {
...
 Audio {
 id: noSound
 source: "/usr/share/harbour-screenshot/noSound.wav"
 }
 // workaround a bug in QtMultimedia
 Component.onCompleted: noSound.play()
 }
}

br
Reto

> just for a few things:
> 1. Play title music
> 2. Play attack sounds of the creatures
>
> I temporary disabled 1. because of a known volume bug
> (https://together.jolla.com/question/421/qaudiooutput-isnt-integrated-with-system-volume-and-libresource-like-qmediaplayer/)
> by setting the source to null.
> 2. is still enabled (because I don't change their volume), but I do play
> sounds only if the application is active and I don't hear anything if I
> run it on my device.
>
> Maybe setting the source of 1. to null is the reason? But in my opinion,
> playing a null source should just result in a returning play() method...
>
> the source of the audio element:
> https://github.com/yoktobit/morzyn/blob/master/qml/MorzynPage.qml
>
> Thanks
> Martin
>
>  > Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:29:31 +0200
>  > From: reto.zi...@jolla.com
>  > To: devel@lists.sailfishos.org
>  > Subject: Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...
>  >
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > On 10.01.2014 11:01, 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
>  >
>  > According to my information the app got not rejected because of AI still
>  > running, but because the audio blocks the power management to go to
>  &g

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Reto Zingg]

Hi,

On 10.01.2014 15:56, Martin Windolph wrote:

Hi,

oh, thanks for the information and sorry then for hijacking this thread.
I thought that it was just an assumption that Audio was the reason.

How can I find out if it's audio that is preventing suspend mode
(emulator or device)?

So Audio output seems to be really a problem in Sailfish OS. I'm using
the QML "Audio" Element of QtMultimedia. Isn't it supported? I use Audio


as Robin wrote in 
https://together.jolla.com/question/421/qaudiooutput-isnt-integrated-with-system-volume-and-libresource-like-qmediaplayer/#post-id-6991 
this combination is an issue at the moment.


But David found a workaround for that at least for his application, 
which passed store QA.


checkout his main.qml from:

https://build.merproject.org/package/files?package=screenshot&project=home%3Albt%3Asailfishos

he does something like:

ffmpeg -ar 48000 -t 0.1 -f s16le -acodec pcm_s16le -ac 2 -i /dev/zero 
-acodec copy noSound.wav


ApplicationWindow {
...
Audio {
id: noSound
source: "/usr/share/harbour-screenshot/noSound.wav"
}
// workaround a bug in QtMultimedia
Component.onCompleted: noSound.play()
}
}

br
Reto


just for a few things:
1. Play title music
2. Play attack sounds of the creatures

I temporary disabled 1. because of a known volume bug
(https://together.jolla.com/question/421/qaudiooutput-isnt-integrated-with-system-volume-and-libresource-like-qmediaplayer/)
by setting the source to null.
2. is still enabled (because I don't change their volume), but I do play
sounds only if the application is active and I don't hear anything if I
run it on my device.

Maybe setting the source of 1. to null is the reason? But in my opinion,
playing a null source should just result in a returning play() method...

the source of the audio element:
https://github.com/yoktobit/morzyn/blob/master/qml/MorzynPage.qml

Thanks
Martin

 > Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:29:31 +0200
 > From: reto.zi...@jolla.com
 > To: devel@lists.sailfishos.org
 > Subject: Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...
 >
 > Hi,
 >
 > On 10.01.2014 11:01, 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
 >
 > According to my information the app got not rejected because of AI still
 > running, but because the audio blocks the power management to go to
 > suspend mode.
 >
 > And since there is no sound audible it might be that sound output is
 > done in a not supported way. (But don't ask me how to do it correctly
 > :-) But I'm sure here are other Sailors which can help you with that in
 > your particular case).
 >
 > see also about how we test:
 > https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/2014-January/002440.html
 >
 > br
 > Reto
 >
 > > 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...
 > > >
 > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 > > > Hash: SHA1
 > > >
 > > > 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

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Martin Windolph]

Hi,

oh, thanks for the information and sorry then for hijacking this thread. 
I thought that it was just an assumption that Audio was the reason.

How can I find out if it's audio that is preventing suspend mode (emulator or 
device)?

So Audio output seems to be really a problem in Sailfish OS. I'm using the QML 
"Audio" Element of QtMultimedia. Isn't it supported? I use Audio just for a few 
things:
1. Play title music
2. Play attack sounds of the creatures

I temporary disabled 1. because of a known volume bug 
(https://together.jolla.com/question/421/qaudiooutput-isnt-integrated-with-system-volume-and-libresource-like-qmediaplayer/)
 by setting the source to null.
2. is still enabled (because I don't change their volume), but I do play sounds 
only if the application is active and I don't hear anything if I run it on my 
device.

Maybe setting the source of 1. to null is the reason? But in my opinion, 
playing a null source should just result in a returning play() method...

the source of the audio element:
https://github.com/yoktobit/morzyn/blob/master/qml/MorzynPage.qml

Thanks
Martin

> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:29:31 +0200
> From: reto.zi...@jolla.com
> To: devel@lists.sailfishos.org
> Subject: Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 10.01.2014 11:01, 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
> 
> According to my information the app got not rejected because of AI still 
> running, but because the audio blocks the power management to go to 
> suspend mode.
> 
> And since there is no sound audible it might be that sound output is 
> done in a not supported way. (But don't ask me how to do it correctly 
> :-) But I'm sure here are other Sailors which can help you with that in 
> your particular case).
> 
> see also about how we test:
> https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/2014-January/002440.html
> 
> br
> Reto
> 
> > 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...
> >  >
> >  > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >  > Hash: SHA1
> >  >
> >  > 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
> >  > (te

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Reto Zingg]

Hi,

On 10.01.2014 11:01, 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


According to my information the app got not rejected because of AI still 
running, but because the audio blocks the power management to go to 
suspend mode.


And since there is no sound audible it might be that sound output is 
done in a not supported way. (But don't ask me how to do it correctly 
:-) But I'm sure here are other Sailors which can help you with that in 
your particular case).


see also about how we test:
https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/2014-January/002440.html

br
Reto


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...
 >
 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 > Hash: SHA1
 >
 > 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
 > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 > Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
 > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
 >
 > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSz6f+AAoJEGEvoAir78RoEOsH/3jBwaf6MTpi0tRqVQXZDvsU
 > nTUoc/H2zFWOFVDoSJqc6FQCQcPue5Fvu/tuGe8zEF8HPeW5Et08dmpGP7wdXurP
 > VJhaG8LOHCMj9AhgPLPkFKJKMCqKR8H0PmbvOaEhj+zua6AdpzlOz4MOPaxeQltz
 > FUbXwnrGNZQ/KRoM1NPJM8g9SkUmkg+1cBBS1ThhJuVP+jANBit9BFJuYnvh8HzO
 > y6ODX+jpn1348p89PWrt1/dDzRqLw62kccf5G6nyaBumjKNdzodfU7/+i2C6wHNG
 > tTfS46ytuebzm/5SMG9yJN77jg1bsFZlHPjiKUp+vLaU99RBWVlFaybJPJf1QAY=
 > =uJPj
 > -END PGP SIGNATURE-
 > ___
 > SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list


___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list



___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Oleksii Serdiuk]

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

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Gabriel Böhme]

Just great to hear. ;-)



--



Von meinem Nokia N9 gesendet



Andrey Kozhevnikov schrieb am 10.01.14 12:23:
I can assure you that the author is aware of Harbour ;)

On 10.01.2014 17:17, Benoît HERVIER wrote:

Indeed, we should suggest it to his author. But that s a beta, i didn't
think he want to push it now.

Regards,

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

 Le 2014-01-10 12:06, Gabriel Böhme a écrit :

 What about pushing the WareHouse app to Jolla Store?! So everyone can find
it. :)



Don't know if possible, just an idea.



--



Von meinem Nokia N9 gesendet



 Benoît HERVIER schrieb am 10.01.14 11:53:
 Hi all !

I'm also waiting that using python interpreter as a dependancy are accepted
in Harbour.
Also some tips suggest that s will be Python 3 ... but SailfishOS still
have py2.7.

While i'm waiting to submit them to harbour, some of my Apps are already
running on my device, and some are already available on OpenRepos.net which
have now a client for Sailfish (beta).

So i suggest you to submit your apps to openrepos.net too. Harbour isn't
anymore the only store for SailfishOS native apps.

Regards,

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

Le 2014-01-10 10:28, Andreas Enbacka a écrit :

> Thanks for the support :)
>
> I will develop QSpot for SailfishOS, timetable however depends on when
> certain libs will be whitelisted / allowed. I could also consider
> publishing an alpha for testing somewhere else. I hope that the QA
> process will be improved and eased, and possible more automation
> added. Having submitted apps to several app stores, e.g., WP Store and
> Google Play, I would stay Google Play is a good example how it should
> work.
>
> //Andreas
>
>> 2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
>>
>>> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
>>> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as
>>> due
>>> to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.
>>
>> This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
>> certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
>> Harbour?
>>
>> Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
>> promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)
>>
>>   Kalle
>>
>>
>
> ___
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list



___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list



___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Andrey Kozhevnikov]

I can assure you that the author is aware of Harbour ;)

On 10.01.2014 17:17, Benoît HERVIER wrote:


Indeed, we should suggest it to his author. But that s a beta, i 
didn't think he want to push it now.


Regards,

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

Le 2014-01-10 12:06, Gabriel Böhme a écrit :

What about pushing the WareHouse app to Jolla Store?! So everyone can 
find it. :)


Don't know if possible, just an idea.

--

Von meinem Nokia N9 gesendet


Benoît HERVIER schrieb am 10.01.14 11:53:

Hi all !

I'm also waiting that using python interpreter as a dependancy are 
accepted in Harbour.
Also some tips suggest that s will be Python 3 ... but SailfishOS 
still have py2.7.


While i'm waiting to submit them to harbour, some of my Apps are 
already running on my device, and some are already available on 
OpenRepos.net which have now a client for Sailfish (beta).


So i suggest you to submit your apps to openrepos.net 
 too. Harbour isn't anymore the only store for 
SailfishOS native apps.


Regards,

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

Le 2014-01-10 10:28, Andreas Enbacka a écrit :

Thanks for the support :)

I will develop QSpot for SailfishOS, timetable however depends on
when
certain libs will be whitelisted / allowed. I could also consider
publishing an alpha for testing somewhere else. I hope that the QA
process will be improved and eased, and possible more automation
added. Having submitted apps to several app stores, e.g., WP
Store and
Google Play, I would stay Google Play is a good example how it should
work.

//Andreas

2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka mailto:aenba...@gmail.com>>:

I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also
partly held off
developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour
process, as well as due
to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.

This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS
that use
certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
Harbour?

Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)

  Kalle



___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list



___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list


___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Benoît HERVIER]

 

Indeed, we should suggest it to his author. But that s a beta, i didn't
think he want to push it now. 

Regards, 

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

Le 2014-01-10 12:06, Gabriel Böhme a écrit : 

> What about pushing the WareHouse app to Jolla Store?! So everyone can find 
> it. :) 
> 
> Don't know if possible, just an idea. 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Von meinem Nokia N9 gesendet 
> 
> Benoît HERVIER schrieb am 10.01.14 11:53: 
> Hi all !
> 
> I'm also waiting that using python interpreter as a dependancy are accepted 
> in Harbour.
> Also some tips suggest that s will be Python 3 ... but SailfishOS still have 
> py2.7.
> 
> While i'm waiting to submit them to harbour, some of my Apps are already 
> running on my device, and some are already available on OpenRepos.net which 
> have now a client for Sailfish (beta).
> 
> So i suggest you to submit your apps to openrepos.net [1] too. Harbour isn't 
> anymore the only store for SailfishOS native apps.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> ---
> Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/ [2]
> 
> Le 2014-01-10 10:28, Andreas Enbacka a écrit :
> Thanks for the support :)
> 
> I will develop QSpot for SailfishOS, timetable however depends on when
> certain libs will be whitelisted / allowed. I could also consider
> publishing an alpha for testing somewhere else. I hope that the QA
> process will be improved and eased, and possible more automation
> added. Having submitted apps to several app stores, e.g., WP Store and
> Google Play, I would stay Google Play is a good example how it should
> work.
> 
> //Andreas
> 2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as due
> to APIs my apps need to are not allowed. This seems backwards; if no cool 
> apps exist for SailfishOS that use
> certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
> Harbour?
> 
> Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
> promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)
> 
> Kalle

 ___
 SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
___
 SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list 

Links:
--
[1] http://openrepos.net
[2] http://khertan.net/
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Gabriel Böhme]

What about pushing the WareHouse app to Jolla Store?! So everyone can find
it. :)


Don't know if possible, just an idea.



--



Von meinem Nokia N9 gesendet



Benoît HERVIER schrieb am 10.01.14 11:53:
Hi all !

I'm also waiting that using python interpreter as a dependancy are accepted
in Harbour.
Also some tips suggest that s will be Python 3 ... but SailfishOS still
have py2.7.

While i'm waiting to submit them to harbour, some of my Apps are already
running on my device, and some are already available on OpenRepos.net which
have now a client for Sailfish (beta).

So i suggest you to submit your apps to openrepos.net too. Harbour isn't
anymore the only store for SailfishOS native apps.

Regards,

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

Le 2014-01-10 10:28, Andreas Enbacka a écrit :

> Thanks for the support :)
>
> I will develop QSpot for SailfishOS, timetable however depends on when
> certain libs will be whitelisted / allowed. I could also consider
> publishing an alpha for testing somewhere else. I hope that the QA
> process will be improved and eased, and possible more automation
> added. Having submitted apps to several app stores, e.g., WP Store and
> Google Play, I would stay Google Play is a good example how it should
> work.
>
> //Andreas
>
>> 2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
>>
>>> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
>>> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as
>>> due
>>> to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.
>>>
>> This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
>> certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
>> Harbour?
>>
>> Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
>> promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)
>>
>>   Kalle
>>
>>
>
> ___
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
>
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Benoît HERVIER]

Hi all !

I'm also waiting that using python interpreter as a dependancy are 
accepted in Harbour.
Also some tips suggest that s will be Python 3 ... but SailfishOS still 
have py2.7.


While i'm waiting to submit them to harbour, some of my Apps are already 
running on my device, and some are already available on OpenRepos.net 
which have now a client for Sailfish (beta).


So i suggest you to submit your apps to openrepos.net too. Harbour isn't 
anymore the only store for SailfishOS native apps.


Regards,

---
Benoît HERVIER - http://khertan.net/

Le 2014-01-10 10:28, Andreas Enbacka a écrit :

Thanks for the support :)

I will develop QSpot for SailfishOS, timetable however depends on when
certain libs will be whitelisted / allowed. I could also consider
publishing an alpha for testing somewhere else. I hope that the QA
process will be improved and eased, and possible more automation
added. Having submitted apps to several app stores, e.g., WP Store and
Google Play, I would stay Google Play is a good example how it should
work.

//Andreas

2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held 
off
developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well 
as due

to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.

This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
Harbour?

Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)

  Kalle




___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Andreas Enbacka]

Thanks for the support :)

I will develop QSpot for SailfishOS, timetable however depends on when 
certain libs will be whitelisted / allowed. I could also consider 
publishing an alpha for testing somewhere else. I hope that the QA 
process will be improved and eased, and possible more automation added. 
Having submitted apps to several app stores, e.g., WP Store and Google 
Play, I would stay Google Play is a good example how it should work.


//Andreas

2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :

I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as due
to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.

This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
Harbour?

Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)

  Kalle




___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Martin Windolph]

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...
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 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
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
> 
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSz6f+AAoJEGEvoAir78RoEOsH/3jBwaf6MTpi0tRqVQXZDvsU
> nTUoc/H2zFWOFVDoSJqc6FQCQcPue5Fvu/tuGe8zEF8HPeW5Et08dmpGP7wdXurP
> VJhaG8LOHCMj9AhgPLPkFKJKMCqKR8H0PmbvOaEhj+zua6AdpzlOz4MOPaxeQltz
> FUbXwnrGNZQ/KRoM1NPJM8g9SkUmkg+1cBBS1ThhJuVP+jANBit9BFJuYnvh8HzO
> y6ODX+jpn1348p89PWrt1/dDzRqLw62kccf5G6nyaBumjKNdzodfU7/+i2C6wHNG
> tTfS46ytuebzm/5SMG9yJN77jg1bsFZlHPjiKUp+vLaU99RBWVlFaybJPJf1QAY=
> =uJPj
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
  ___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Kalle Vahlman]

2014/1/10 Ruediger Gad :
> On 01/10/2014 09:32 AM, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
>> 2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
>>> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
>>> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as due
>>> to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.
>>
>> This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
>> certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
>> Harbour?
>>
>> Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
>> promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)
>>
>>  Kalle
>>
>
> Well, that is some kind of a hen and egg problem.
> One view on this is, as you say, when there is no app that requires lib
> X, lib X won't be added.
> On the other hand, if lib X is not present, developer of app Y requiring
> lib X might not port/develop app Y for Sailfish or submission to Harbour.
> So, there is at least some potential to end up in a deadlock situation.

Sure, but only if one sees acceptance to Harbour as the immediate
target rather than developing an app for SailfishOS. Those are two
distinctive targets, or at least should be. Harbour/Jolla Store is by
no means the only way to install software to the phone.

> Futhermore, having a cool tool set, in form of libs etc., available may
> also spark creativity among developers and thus result in more cool apps
> being developed for Sailfish and pushed to Harbour.

That's right, but given that you can pull almost anything from
mer/nemo into the phone it's mostly valid point just for the latter.

-- 
Kalle Vahlman, Movial Creative Technologies Inc.
Porkkalankatu 20, FI-00180 Helsinki
Tel +358 9 8567 6400
Fax +358 9 8567 6401
www.movial.com
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Ruediger Gad]

Hi,

thanks, yeah, Kontio also commented on this and closed the request.
I actually searched before posting but didn't find that one.
Thanks again.



BR,

Ruediger




On 01/10/2014 09:45 AM, Reto Zingg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 10.01.2014 10:36, Ruediger Gad wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I agree as well.
>> Having a quicker way to check at least simple requirements would greatly
>> improve the developer experience as well as the work of the testers at
>> Harbour.
>> I filed a request about this at together.jolla.com:
>> https://together.jolla.com/question/13023/harbour-toolautomatism-for-quickly-checking-simple-compliance-requirements/
>>
> 
> That's a duplicate request... see current answer here:
> 
> https://together.jolla.com/question/1593/integrate-qa-testing-scripts-with-sailfish-sdk/#post-id-8663
> 
> 
> br
> Reto
> 
> 
>> This is not intended as complaint but as a request to improve things.
>> I think, having a quicker way to check compliance would not only benefit
>> us developers but would also ease the work of the testers at Harbour as
>> they would not need to complain about simple "standard" issues that
>> often.
>>
>> Besides, I just got an app rejected again (after about two days) because
>> I missed one path that was not according to the XDG requirements.
>> Yeah, I know, I should have looked more thoroughly (I actually grepped
>> through all my sources but somehow still managed to miss that one
>> thing.) but in that case a tool that I could run or a pre-check that is
>> run automatically after uploading an *.rpm to Harbour would have been
>> great.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Ruediger
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/10/2014 09:01 AM, Andreas Enbacka wrote:
>>> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
>>> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as
>>> due to APIs my apps need to are not allowed. I think that in case Jolla
>>> wants developers to focus on developing native apps for SailfishOS, many
>>> improvments are needed in this area.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andreas Enbacka
>>>
>>> On 10.1.2014 9:57, Franck Routier (perso) wrote:
>>> 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
>>
> 
> ___
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list


-- 
http://ruedigergad.com
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Reto Zingg]

Hi,

On 10.01.2014 10:36, Ruediger Gad wrote:

Hi,

I agree as well.
Having a quicker way to check at least simple requirements would greatly
improve the developer experience as well as the work of the testers at
Harbour.
I filed a request about this at together.jolla.com:
https://together.jolla.com/question/13023/harbour-toolautomatism-for-quickly-checking-simple-compliance-requirements/


That's a duplicate request... see current answer here:

https://together.jolla.com/question/1593/integrate-qa-testing-scripts-with-sailfish-sdk/#post-id-8663

br
Reto



This is not intended as complaint but as a request to improve things.
I think, having a quicker way to check compliance would not only benefit
us developers but would also ease the work of the testers at Harbour as
they would not need to complain about simple "standard" issues that often.

Besides, I just got an app rejected again (after about two days) because
I missed one path that was not according to the XDG requirements.
Yeah, I know, I should have looked more thoroughly (I actually grepped
through all my sources but somehow still managed to miss that one
thing.) but in that case a tool that I could run or a pre-check that is
run automatically after uploading an *.rpm to Harbour would have been great.



Best regards,

Ruediger




On 01/10/2014 09:01 AM, Andreas Enbacka wrote:

I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as
due to APIs my apps need to are not allowed. I think that in case Jolla
wants developers to focus on developing native apps for SailfishOS, many
improvments are needed in this area.

Regards,
Andreas Enbacka

On 10.1.2014 9:57, Franck Routier (perso) wrote:
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




___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Ruediger Gad]

On 01/10/2014 09:32 AM, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
> 2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
>> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
>> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as due
>> to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.
> 
> This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
> certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
> Harbour?
> 
> Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
> promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)
> 
>  Kalle
> 

Well, that is some kind of a hen and egg problem.
One view on this is, as you say, when there is no app that requires lib
X, lib X won't be added.
On the other hand, if lib X is not present, developer of app Y requiring
lib X might not port/develop app Y for Sailfish or submission to Harbour.
So, there is at least some potential to end up in a deadlock situation.

Futhermore, having a cool tool set, in form of libs etc., available may
also spark creativity among developers and thus result in more cool apps
being developed for Sailfish and pushed to Harbour.
I think we all want to see Sailfish succeed and are highly motivated to
contribute cool content, apps, etc.



BR,

Ruediger




-- 
http://ruedigergad.com
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Jukka Eklund]

That's right!

You can get your app into eg. openrepos.net, and there is a store app now
for Sailfish too: https://openrepos.net/content/basil/warehouse


On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Kalle Vahlman wrote:

> 2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
> > I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
> > developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as
> due
> > to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.
>
> This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
> certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
> Harbour?
>
> Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
> promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)
>
>  Kalle
>
> --
> Kalle Vahlman, Movial Creative Technologies Inc.
> Porkkalankatu 20, FI-00180 Helsinki
> Tel +358 9 8567 6400
> Fax +358 9 8567 6401
> www.movial.com
> ___
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
>
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Ruediger Gad]

Hi,

I agree as well.
Having a quicker way to check at least simple requirements would greatly
improve the developer experience as well as the work of the testers at
Harbour.
I filed a request about this at together.jolla.com:
https://together.jolla.com/question/13023/harbour-toolautomatism-for-quickly-checking-simple-compliance-requirements/

This is not intended as complaint but as a request to improve things.
I think, having a quicker way to check compliance would not only benefit
us developers but would also ease the work of the testers at Harbour as
they would not need to complain about simple "standard" issues that often.

Besides, I just got an app rejected again (after about two days) because
I missed one path that was not according to the XDG requirements.
Yeah, I know, I should have looked more thoroughly (I actually grepped
through all my sources but somehow still managed to miss that one
thing.) but in that case a tool that I could run or a pre-check that is
run automatically after uploading an *.rpm to Harbour would have been great.



Best regards,

Ruediger




On 01/10/2014 09:01 AM, Andreas Enbacka wrote:
> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as
> due to APIs my apps need to are not allowed. I think that in case Jolla
> wants developers to focus on developing native apps for SailfishOS, many
> improvments are needed in this area.
> 
> Regards,
> Andreas Enbacka
> 
> On 10.1.2014 9:57, Franck Routier (perso) wrote:
> 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

-- 
http://ruedigergad.com
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Kalle Vahlman]

2014/1/10 Andreas Enbacka :
> I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off
> developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as due
> to APIs my apps need to are not allowed.

This seems backwards; if no cool apps exist for SailfishOS that use
certain API's, what's the incentive for Jolla to allow them in
Harbour?

Please please do develop for SailfishOS and *make* Jolla beg and
promise anything to get your superb app submitted to Harbour! ;)

 Kalle

-- 
Kalle Vahlman, Movial Creative Technologies Inc.
Porkkalankatu 20, FI-00180 Helsinki
Tel +358 9 8567 6400
Fax +358 9 8567 6401
www.movial.com
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

Re: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Andreas Enbacka]

I would like to agree with Franck on this. I have also partly held off 
developing for SailfishOS due to e.g., the Harbour process, as well as 
due to APIs my apps need to are not allowed. I think that in case Jolla 
wants developers to focus on developing native apps for SailfishOS, many 
improvments are needed in this area.


Regards,
Andreas Enbacka

On 10.1.2014 9:57, Franck Routier (perso) wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSz6f+AAoJEGEvoAir78RoEOsH/3jBwaf6MTpi0tRqVQXZDvsU
nTUoc/H2zFWOFVDoSJqc6FQCQcPue5Fvu/tuGe8zEF8HPeW5Et08dmpGP7wdXurP
VJhaG8LOHCMj9AhgPLPkFKJKMCqKR8H0PmbvOaEhj+zua6AdpzlOz4MOPaxeQltz
FUbXwnrGNZQ/KRoM1NPJM8g9SkUmkg+1cBBS1ThhJuVP+jANBit9BFJuYnvh8HzO
y6ODX+jpn1348p89PWrt1/dDzRqLw62kccf5G6nyaBumjKNdzodfU7/+i2C6wHNG
tTfS46ytuebzm/5SMG9yJN77jg1bsFZlHPjiKUp+vLaU99RBWVlFaybJPJf1QAY=
=uJPj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list



___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

[SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

[Franck Routier (perso)]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSz6f+AAoJEGEvoAir78RoEOsH/3jBwaf6MTpi0tRqVQXZDvsU
nTUoc/H2zFWOFVDoSJqc6FQCQcPue5Fvu/tuGe8zEF8HPeW5Et08dmpGP7wdXurP
VJhaG8LOHCMj9AhgPLPkFKJKMCqKR8H0PmbvOaEhj+zua6AdpzlOz4MOPaxeQltz
FUbXwnrGNZQ/KRoM1NPJM8g9SkUmkg+1cBBS1ThhJuVP+jANBit9BFJuYnvh8HzO
y6ODX+jpn1348p89PWrt1/dDzRqLw62kccf5G6nyaBumjKNdzodfU7/+i2C6wHNG
tTfS46ytuebzm/5SMG9yJN77jg1bsFZlHPjiKUp+vLaU99RBWVlFaybJPJf1QAY=
=uJPj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list