[Galaxy S Advance I9070 Original Android Developmen] Paul L.:
This is my last act of complaint about being recognized. You have to read the following sentence.

I DON'T WANT TO GET YOU BANNED, YOU GOT BANNED? WELL, THAT'S YOUR FAULT. DON'T EVEN COMMENT WHAT I'M GOING TO POST, DON'T EVEN REPLY, I CONSIDER EVERYTHING ELSE BELOW THIS AS OFFTOPIC, AND THAT'S IT, JUST DON'T FU***** COMMENT ABOUT THIS

I hopefully reached you in what I said on the top and bottom, no comments, that's it

I sent this PM to Jonny, moderator from this device subforum.

I am aware that R_a_z_v_a_n created a thread about maclaw, our team, and concerning of our status on the RD program.

I stated at first, that it wasn't about Maclaw getting or not the RD status, I just stated (a opinion) that his work was recognized on the main portal of XDA, while many others, like OliverG96, which IS a RD in fact didn't even get a mention, because most of the work actually done was by OliverG96. and then kanged by maclaw and people. While I fully undestand that Apache license allows that, the RD Minimum requirements states:

Feature lists and changelogs need to be free of blurry expressions like “tweaked ext4 performance” and other meaningless terms. Instead it should be explained what was done in detail and why it was done.

And also, No history of bans and/or serious infractions

And with the first point, there comes when ROM is posted.

Threads show a clear overview of changes made, in a way that DC can clearly see what has been developed by the user.

While sources aren't available, a device with such closed chipset and with a company not longer existing, with two legal parts that are the Dutch STMicroelectronics and the Swedish Telefonaktiebolaget L. M. Ericsson that were a joint venture. There is no way that original development is/was made at all without proving it. And by proving it, sources, mostly the device sources must be taken in consideration. You can't just know what was/wasn't taken from if there are just only two teams doing work for this. We shared the code, and Maclaw didn't. How can anyone be sure that Maclaw didn't use it when it's not available? huh?

XDA Rules states this.

12. Using the work of others.

If you are developing something that is based on the work of another Member, you MUST first seek their permission, and you must give credit to the member whose work you used. If a dispute occurs about who developed / created a piece of work, first try to settle the matter by private message and NOT in open forum. If this fails then you may contact a moderator with clear evidence that the work was created by you

.

These rules apply to all software posted on XDA (including but not limited to ROMs, RUUs, apps, games, kernels, themes, icons, etc) unless that software comes with a license that waives these rules.

______________________________________________________

and secondly

______________________________________________________

13. Advertising and Income Generation

Commercial advertising, advertising referral links, pay per click links and other income generating methods are forbidden. Do not use xda-developers as a means to make money.

This (original) source of omxil-bellagio sources is available for free on OliverG96 personal account.

https://github.com/OliverG96/android_device_samsung_golden/tree/cm-10.2/opensource/libomxil-bellagio

And these, are the (kanged) sources from maclaw on his page.

http://get.maclaw.pl/?id=45

He is breaking not only the XDA rules, atleast the Nº 13, but also breaking LGPLv2, while the Khronos Web Group, STMicroelectronics, and also OliverG96 provided a free of royalties (of that, being advertisement, because he can't use a download of a GPL licensed library just to make someone wait and get a Ad register from the visit of some people.), he is using instead an external website, and in his package he is not even stating what GPL license is being used, nor, any specifications of what GPL means for end users.

https://github.com/OpenMaclaw/device_samsung_golden

Device sources were forked from OliverG96 in this example.

https://github.com/Benzonat0r/android_hardware_u8500

Benzonat0r is a new member of the maclaw team, this is one of our forked libraries, which I don't understand why it wasn't even touched, it was, just forked. http://maclaw.pl/2013/11/10/new-maclawstudio-member/

And for last. http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=28463665&postcount=884

Stated by an ADMIN, NOT BEING GPL compilant, and I actually had the device which was that ROM for.

And lastly, this.

__________________________________________________________________

About the TeamCanjica.

Even after that, while I mostly don't care about the souce kanging without even asking or even giving credits, I was upset that the title of the news was "http://www.xda-developers.com/android/kitkat-conquers-novathor-early-cm11-for-the-galaxy-siii-mini/"

While we had a lot more conquers, http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2334423.

We started cross-developing on CM-10.1, those Xperias weren't getting ANY support from FreeXperia, and they could possibly been stuck on CM 10 forever. And we got it running TWO days after development started. http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=42912128&postcount=99

But we didn't get any recognition. When I filled out the form for the RD program, I mentioned every other work apart from PAC, but since PAC was actually the only ROM that actually was of my ownership, which I compiled, that was the only one counted on. While I was not only developing PAC for S Advance, but also CM-10.1 for S Advance, for Xperia U, and for Xperia P.

And while this was just a complain on a thread and I specified that those members also deserve a RD title; someone came up and decided to make a complaint, I adviced them to not say swears, to not over complicate things for them and for us. This PM isn't just for saying the above but to say that they aren't guilt, the ones who support don't deserve to get banned by mistakes of my own, I hope nobody got any punishment without deserving it, and sorry to bother with this long PM.

And again, read the top and below, if you clicked the spoiler.

I DON'T WANT TO GET YOU BANNED, YOU GOT BANNED? WELL, THAT'S YOUR FAULT. DON'T EVEN COMMENT WHAT I'M GOING TO POST, DON'T EVEN REPLY, I CONSIDER EVERYTHING ELSE BELOW THIS AS OFFTOPIC, AND THAT'S IT, JUST DON'T FU***** COMMENT ABOUT THIS