yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
Sure, too much talking can be a problem.

To less, could also be bad.

I don't comply with everything said here, but it helped me, to adjust my focus to rethinking year old opinions and ask more for current motivations of "projects".

And, if I only follow maniac's words, still then I question myself, if CM goes in the directions, I want a part of my world to be in. And I don't think so.

So much influence, so much dev power, so good reputation, so great work... and sadly I think, they don't take the responsibility to make the world a better place, instead just concentrating on the own "success".

OK, here come politics, but politics are also a part of our each and own individual reality like CM is. The news showed us that we are in 2013 and not just 1984 anymore... much is lost, privacy hard to maintain... and what does CM? gives us a privacy guard, which isn't one. A false feeling of safety. CM would be better without it. ..ah, wait... then the "consumer" installs less CM.

Yes, that is only one point/ app, but it was an eyeopener for me.

And like anybody else, who isn't active in the AOSP/AOKP/CM/DEV scene, I am not able to invest weeks to get proberly informed to judge for or against CM .. so I rely on own experience like with pguard, some research.. and sure, will be wrong in one or another point of view. But so that's life.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
IRC discussion involving atinm and arcee (I think), I can find it if you want a reference.

I honestly don't want to turn it into a crusade and I'm glad to discuss it. The trouble is that he's said on the record that he doesn't like these settings and finds them pointless.

Indeed, I remember defy parts actually :) kudos for it, was a good solution that saw through a lot of use.

I see fully the advantages, as I actually backed him originally when the choice of device parts versus putting options in the "logical" places was discussed on the old mailing list. It makes more sense to put the settings into display than advanced, for example.

The entire disagreement stems over the process - removing what works before implementing the new solution? That's bad programming practice in any scheme of work I've seen. Couple that with his apparent dislike for per device customisation... I know other CM guys who have been put off work on the n4 due to this attitude, but it's up to them if they want to come forward or not...

Regarding CTS, any thoughts on the continual trend to try to pass CTS? Saying no to su daemon by default for the reason of "it breaks CTS", rather than the obvious "well root is dangerous, disable by default" which I thought would be the reason...

I can find you the discussion regarding SD cards if you like, where one of the CM guys was asked by another if he would implement the camera storage toggle, and he said no, and was applauded since it would break CTS.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] derPianist:
wrong thread. delete.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
On the other hand, it could be a more modern definition of privacy. Privacy of personal data (which gets obvious with meta data tracking) seems all that's left of a person's accepted privacy needs.

As Google stated latest in reference to the 1979 ruling: there is no privacy if you couldn't have expected privacy.

Google used this related to gmail.

Sent from mobile.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Entropy512:
Yeah. I gave up on trying to even get the kernel side of the gamma patch merged in. It was on gerrit for over two months with not a single comment from the maintainer (and yes, they were added to review AND pinged on G+ about it at the beginning of the effort.)

However, as far as CTS compatibility - If we flagrantly violate CTS, then we risk Google taking measures to block our access to the Play Store for breaking apps.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] kokesh:
I guess the solution would be to remove Ricardo and re-add device specific settings. WTF?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
If I may... I don't think these two scenarios can be compared.

CM is supposed to be open. So, its maintainers / admins should be open about it. Right?

In this case, complaining on the matter that admins don't do things as they should, is okay.

XDA is a forum. It isn't supposed to be open (sourced?) or GPL or anything... Right? So... its admins have the right to discuss matters with regards to who gets banned and who doesn't, behind closed doors. Right?

Those are... two entirely different things.

(English did get a pretty good beating in this post, I know. I apologise)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
Really?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
I do understand the importance of appstores, especially Playstore, but isn't this an indication, that the playing field should be leveled?

If I remember right, Google announced it great and new and free OS to the dev world in the early days and got lots of attention... and help.

Now, as Android has round about 80%(!) market share, google improves it services, connects them and uses it like any normal corporation uses its products, e.g. sideloading is not adviced, virus warnings to get fear into the customer, to make him purchase only in play store... isn't this a time, where other services and possibilities should be researched?

As I bought a waste of apps in the store for personal use and or support, I now write mails every one to three days to devs, for solving my "licence problem".

It is not fair, but I didn't think about this hard enough in the past. Now I am bound to google or have to pay the toll.

I pay gladly the toll and there are still options left. I am not happy with using AndroidPit or Amazon either, but at least... it is a market.. an app at top of my os, which offers me payment modalities and an app catalog.

Thinking back, I love the ancient times, where I bought apps only direct from the devs... and later struggled with device changes, etc... :D... but I think, the additional 20% (lets take 10% for advertising) are worth the occasional support.

I don't want anybody to break things, I don't want CM to step out of the economy, but everyone should ask himself, what he is supporting.

And if CTS is such a problem.. and everything would be fine and happy happy wonderland without... why not to branches?

Any car manufacturer does this, sportcars and family vans ;).

And yes, I know it is additional work, and no, I don't know how much...
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] AlienSr1:
I have now been using CM for approx. 5 years or so but I've never heard about CTS compatibility in that time, so how long does this already exist? I do know what CTS is though.

Also isn't there a lot of ROMs out there which do not try to match CTS requirements and still do have access to the play store etc.?

Sent from a spaceship.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Mazda:
If I may....

If you took the time to read, you would see that AbsolutZeroGI replying in regards to the OP saying that none of this was discussed with public.

If it wasn't, then it wasn't!

Just because a ROM is open source, doesn't make it public property where every noob on XDA has to get a say in what goes in and out of the ROM.

User opinion is generally considered but is not the final say.

Many of you forget that CM doesn't owe anyone in here ****! NOTHING! ZERO!

Complaining about what they do with THEIR rom is just crazy if you ask me! I mean, is like if you built a house and then I come over and tell you that you need to repaint the walls because my cousin on my momma's sister's side doesn't like it hahaha

Granted in this case, the OP is someone with a few titles and he may push his weight around and influence others to take his side BUT at the end of the day, is STILL CM's ROM.

I've read the back/forth between the OP and maniac103 and both bring up good points to an extend but NOBODY here has any right to say that CM is going down the wrong path or whatever....NOBODY!

As crazy as it sounds, if you don't like something......then don't do it! This is a FREE ROM, is not like you're paying to flash here. NOBODY is putting a gun to anyone's head and saying, you WILL flash CM in the condition it is now.

I originally made a post on this thread because the hypocrisy has drove me up a wall but now I'm seeing users complain like they own something! WE DON'T OWN CM!

If you donated, that's fine BUT that's not a pass to demand things or complain like you're being cheated out of something!

/rant
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
This... went unanswered. Probably burried under piles of posts... So, I'm bumping it. Hope that's okay :)

---------- Post added at 04:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:08 PM ----------

You're right. We should stop. Until things are starting to go down (which isn't happening now)...
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] tetakpatak:
As much I can see, mate, none of the devices has CM 10.2 ROM that works as good as 10.1x does right now. It is in the test phase. If you need good working ROM, best you can do is to flash again CM 10.1 and gapps back.... I just did it last evening on my tablet.

Be careful, it needs full wipe/reset as the re-partitioning is different. And if you don't flash exactly the same ROM you did your nandroid backup from, maybe you won't be able to restore your backup anymore.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
If I may support Mazda, public discussions are not mandatory neither good in most cases.

I myself developed and maintained a social network with 5 numbers user count. It was free and I am at reworking a new version, which will be free to use again.

Public discussions are mostly bad, because of: many unmatured ideas are discussed until the final answer is there. often answers don't please the public, even if the result do.

So, that is no legit critic to CM for me.

But, if descisions are made, you are wise - as maintainer/owner/whatever - to communicate them proberly and clearl and loud.

And that is what I missed at CM. They never stated: "Yeah, we made some cool stuff, but nowadays we are more into commercial interests, sorry folks, but privacy guard is a feature we dislike, but we put in a dummy so you don't feel so bad".

THIS is my PERSONAL interpretation and not accountable to CM in general for everyone. But, as not having the insight, but the (gone) thrust into CM, I feel slighty fuc... by this feature.

Maybe it is the only one, maybe everything else is great - but my concern is my privacy, which I violate often enough by myself, either of laziness, comfort or not better knowing... but this as I ruin it by myself.. it is "ok". ;)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Mazda:
I agree, public discussions are NOT mandatory! :)

The OP on the other hand made it out to seem as if he had been cheated out of something and some how CM was to run it through him and start up a thread and get some polls going......

That to me is something that would of been nice tbh BUT at the end of the day, you can't get upset or throw a hissy fit or anything if it doesn't happen.

As for everything else, if you don't like CM then there are other options. There's PA, AOKP, PAC, the list goes on and on and on

Also there is the option of forking CM, rolling your sleeves up and git reverting whatever you don't like...cherry picking what you want in and calling it a day! haha

I still don't understand why someone in the position that the OP is in and with the knowledge that he has, would throw a hissy fit about something that is common sense to me.

CM doesn't report to anyone on XDA, no matter if you're elite or not

CM doesn't owe anyone ANYTHING, so don't throw your hands up in the air and act like they do

NOBODY is getting cheated out of anything.......oh and final thing I will say as I'm seeing a lot of users refer to themselves as customers

Unless you're paying cash money up front for CM, you're not a customer

You're using a product (CM) that's free of charge with no strings attached, therefore you are a USER not a customer

Don't try to refer yourself as a customer to try to put yourself in the victim slot because you're neither a victim or a customer. You're just a member of a public forum using an open source ROM :)

/rant
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lolmensch:
i seem to recall that it was bad exynos support. had the same issue long time ago with the i9100. not sure though..

[MENTION=1289361]Mazda[/MENTION]:

try to see it from another point of view. Of course nobody forces anybody to use cm but whats the point of cm? Offering a rom for power users. Okay that was nice from v3 or 4 til v7 and it started to decline, shifting to a rom for regular end users. Okay that is their decision, I totally agree with you.

But then what's going on here is most likely just a prelude to what's happening to cm. If they really want to commercialize and they fail, cm will be abandoned. Power users are highly disappointed by the cm team as they didn't listen to them, blinded by their aim to commercialize and end users might reject it as it probably is just a slightly improved aosp. Giant's like Samsung, Sony and HTC will surely develop the same features and more if cm tries to be a serious competition.

So where do we stand after that? CM is either part of android's passed history or maybe having a restart at going for power users. Power users might see that coming and therefore are trying to stop that movement which is always (falsely) interpreted as whining and complaining and as if they know everything better.

It just seems to me that if cm will really go the route with cts and commercialization and whatsoever they will have to learn the hard way what it means to be in the big sea with all the big fish like sammy and the others. I really can't see a way how they want to succeed.

I for sure am going to switch to messy roms like aokp, pacman or paranoid android. At least for me there is functionality > user friendliness. So cm lost one of those power users but sure they will get at least 3 normal users instead. We will see where this all leads to.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] maniac103:
The CM code is open - that doesn't mean we hold a user poll for each and every decision. A project with that many users simply wouldn't get to any decision if run that way.

Come on, please stop such childish BS and stop manipulation by omitting facts. :rolleyes: I'm pretty sure you have seen the number of +1 and +2 for patch set 16 and the number of comments throughout the change. The only reason it was committed with a single +2 was that a single misleading translation needed to be removed after PS16.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Mazda:
Well the thing is that nobody is ever happy with anything!

You include a bunch of features or "knobs" like maniac103 was calling them then you get the people that claim is messing up the ROM and if you go the other direction, you get the same haha

I can see what you're saying [MENTION=1895945]lolmensch[/MENTION] but at the end of the day, is their ROM and they are more then free to do what they want with their ROM.

We don't pay their bills or employ them in any form or shape so we don't have ANY say in it.

We do have a few options.

1. Just go and use another ROM, plenty of options out there

2. Fork CM and do what you got to do and call it a day

3. Just be patient and see what comes of all this change that CM is doing

BUT complaining about it and saying that CM should of discussed things with us and how DARE CM not do what we want is just crazy and it solves NOTHING!

I just wish the OP could of seen this instead of starting a mess that in the end will solve nothing and just bring negative attention to fellow moderators, etc
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lupe Fiasco:
What's so hard for people to understand?

Posting your Novel long paragraphs talking about things CM should and shouldn't do doesn't matter here. CM doesn't even use XDA anymore. If your problem with CM is that big of a deal go post at their forums where they might actually see it, or better yet just message Steve Kondik or any other Known CM Dev on Google+ or Twitter.

All in all, you got a prob with CM and you feel it's important, message them, don't post it here, send it to one of the Devs on Twitter or Google+.

If CM doesn't have a feature you want and your just really mad about it, move on, find a Rom that does have the feature you want.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] chickoo.t90:
Looking at it as 'complaining' or 'ranting' is a bit shallow.

Look at at in a more emotional way... The people who are actually 'complaining' or 'ranting' are worried! Worried, maybe because something they have believed in, have been with for a long long time and also have seen grown up like a baby,,, has lost their faith.

Now these people who are worried may be wrong.... But again when trust snaps it a fault of both parties, both the parties end up with a little pain and yes it becomes a duty of both the parties to settle the differences and learn what went wrong....

It just requires a dialogue!
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lupe Fiasco:
I'm fine with that, the point I'm trying to make is that your words will not be heard on XDA, if you really care about CM, than you would try to message them on sites they user personally. Posting here won't make a difference, sending a message to their Twitter or Google+ will have more of a chance to make a difference.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] AlienSr1:
I do completely agree with the above.

Maybe this discussion was not the best on xda, but after all it was a discussion. Everyone does have a different opinion on this topic, so you can bet people won't agree with everything that was said.

For everyone who sais: Stop complaining, don't use xda for that etc. etc.: Last time I checked xda was a FREE and OPEN forum to discuss stuff related (in any way) to mobile devices, operating systems, custom roms, "hacks", mods and such.

If the OP decides to start a discussion on his thread nobody should come over and say: Stop whining on xda.

I do however also agree to those who said we maybe should stop this for a while, calm down and see how things go.

Now let's all be friends again! :victory:
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Entropy512:
It's existed since the beginning of time pretty much. It also evolves somewhat as Android evolves. In the past, it was recommended that applications not have direct write access to external storage. The CTS was changed to be that applications must not have direct write access to external storage. (I could be somewhat wrong about the exact wording here, but it effectively said, "camera app shouldn't write to external storage.")

Thing is that as the largest AOSP derivative project, CM attracts more attention from Google than any other project. If a smaller project flagrantly violates the CTS, if they're small, Google may not find out or pay attention. However the CM team has a long history of working with Google - that's how the gapps compromise came to be, among other things. So when a Google engineer says, "This is a really bad idea" - the team listens. (That's why Cornerstone never made it in and you'll never see PA's Halo make it in - these are fundamental violations of the CTS/CDD, and the ways in which they break apps were described quite clearly by Dianne.) Also, I think Google sees CM as leading by example, so if CM starts setting an example that is contrary to Google's goals in a way that breaks the Play Store apps, members of the team will get pinged about it. (For example, someone from Google pinged multiple CM members to make sure no one was going to pull in PA's per-app DPI stuff.)

There's more going on than the DeviceSettings mess, but I'm hoping the other stuff gets resolved more amicably so I'm holding back from discussing it publically at the moment.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
If you want to sell a device legitimately with google's bits on it, it must pass CTS testing.

CTS testing was originally a really good idea - it basically guarantees that "Android" is android, and that an android app will run on your "android" (to use android as a noun meaning device here).

The trouble is that Google now uses CTS to influence the direction of handsets to match their business model. For example, they are now against external SD storage, as they prefer internal for various reasons. I have no doubt the fact Google is involved in "cloud storage" offerings is not entirely unrelated (though there are other reasons for it, which can all be worked round).

The issue is if you want to ship a device with gapps, you must comply with CTS. As CTS becomes more and more restrictive, it's just spoiling the landscape for everyone. Had Google used it solely to ensure apps would run as expected, it would be a load different. But if Google is going to use CTS to push their direction of handsets, that's a sad day for Android.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] AlienSr1:
I don't agree with that.

The word has already been heard and the discussion expanded to reddit and G+. (There was a link to G+ a few pages back, if you want to check that out.) I have only read the first few comments and I can tell you it's BAD. So many people there are just hating on each other without even knowing exactly what the initial post in here was. I haven't even botherd looking at reddit but I can imagine it is even worse there.

PS: Thanks [MENTION=2178960]pulser_g2[/MENTION] and [MENTION=591147]Entropy512[/MENTION] for the answer, I have run out of "Thanks" :( :p.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
I have a few ideas there, but nothing I am confident yet to pass out for testing tbh - still WAY too experimental, I am regularly tweaking and rebooting and breaking stuff... If I can get it better, I will see what I can do.

These issues are unfortunately fairly tough to fix, as we hvae to narrow them down first. I'm not at my main PC with access to the things I need to rattle off regular builds right now, but when I am, I will try look if I get time, at your issue :)

I'd like to solve annoying device niggles like this - likely graphics related.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
Reddit lived up to its name, and is actually fairly reasoned. The opinion on reddit seems to be that this is something they want to know, and watch to see what happens. A few good questions and topics for further debate there.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lupe Fiasco:
I know, I've seen them. What I'm trying to say is, it might be better to just message the known devs personally than start threads etc.. in the long run.

Unrelated to my top post - If a dev with no titles would have posted what Pulser did than I can guarantee that a Mod would have cleaned up the thread and said "Get back to discussion about the Rom" and before you say this is, no it's not. This current discussion has basically been about the personal choices CM have been making lately.