Here's what Cyanogen said on the Official CyanogenMod Forums.
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/a-note-on-unofficial-ports-and-how-to-get-it-right
With this said, why don't we jump on the bandwagon and just join the CM team? Why don't we make this thing official (if we haven't tried already)? Just a thought, so don't kill me with your opinions. The Devs here are freakin' legit here and I'd like to see 'em do some of the work on the CM Team.
I trust the devs I download from because I follow their work. I don't need it to be "official". Besides, I like the personal touch and one-on-one support I get right here on the xda eris forum. And there's variety.
We could debate the politics of branding and what is CM and what is not CM. But the devs here disclose their sources, changes, known issues and brand their roms as uniquely their own while providing the support and updates. I don't think there's any confusion as to what is 'official' and what is not as the Android Police article referenced in CM's statement implies.
+1. The devs here are excellent, and the devs that base there ROMs on CM list them as "based" on CM not the official CM ROM. I'm not aware of any confusion that this has caused. I'm also not sure what creative constraints would be put on our devs if they went CM. I like the way they individualize the roms for thier personalities and their audiences. I also am not sure what benefit would come with being an "official" CM rom. Just my 2 cents.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not discrediting the Developers that cook these ROM by ANY MEANS whatsoever. They do incredible work with what they push, but here's what I'm saying. The CM ROMS are based off of Official CM Source Code, yes, but I think we'd be making it way easier on ourselves and the developers if we were an actual part of CyanogenMod. If we were a part of CM, then we'd get the CM ROMS as perfect as they can get and THEN the developers can add their own customization to a ROM based off of the Eris Release of CyanogenMod. They all are already doing the work that it would take to actually /BE/ a part of the CyanogenMod team, so why not get on with CyanogenMod so we can be official, and THEN the devs can customize and tweak ROMS they way they see fit?
Once again, absolutely NO discredit to the developers here, and I understand what it takes to keep these ROMS current and I am very appreciative of their work.
The CM ROMs that we have are either built from CM source or ported from the Hero builds already. I'm not really sure what this would give us other than maybe a "go team go" feeling and maybe a little more help than we already get. But the Eris and CDMA Hero are so similar, that doesn't matter much in my opinion as long as any Hero issues get worked out.
The CM buildbots are just building from source and posting the results, much like you would get if you ran EasyDev or did it manually. Now, there's a lot of work going on before that with the code, of course. But... That's what we use too.
I'm not against this at all. It just means that someone will have to 1) want to do it 2) have the time 3) convince Team Douche to let them in. I seem to remember that someone asked early on and the response was that we had to send them an Eris. This might have changed.
This comes up every so often. I guess one of us can find out what we would need to do at least...
Nothing would really change for the end user if we became official cm at this point. Basically one of the devs here that builds from source would submit their vendor tree to the cm source and they would be responsible for maintaining it just like we do now. The only real difference would be that it would get built by the cm build bot and nightly's would be released. I tweeted to cyanogen about getting my 2.2 tree in there along time ago when 2.2 was new but either I did it wrong(not a twitter person lol) or it just got lost in the many many tweets that go through cyanogens account. I never really pushed the issue more because of the extra time it would take me personally and it was just easier to work on my own schedule.
The only added benefit would be that maybe if there was an issue we could not fix then the cm team would take an extra look at our specific phone to help out but really since our phone is so close to the hero and it has official support they sort of fix most of our bugs anyway. I've personally always tried to give the cm team all the credit they deserve(which is alot) and I think the other dev's do the same.
Here's what Cyanogen posted up to www.cyanogenmod.com a week or so again. It looks like we'd need an interested dev here to stop by #cyanogenmod-dev on Freenode to start the process.
I think (and I use xtrSENSE, so I could be wrong) that a lot of people would like and "official" CM port for the Eris, just so they'd have "peace of mind" knowing they've got something "official."
And again, as we've seen mentioned in this post, it couldn't hurt to ask. Provided Team Douche doesn't actually want an Eris, we only stand to gain extra help on our ports.
Cyanogen said:
There’s been some recent talk about unofficial versions of CyanogenMod being created and released on sites like XDA, with large amounts of missing features and broken functionality, and I just wanted to talk about our position on this.
An “official” CyanogenMod version is one that uses our code review system, our source repository, and our mirror network. It should look, act, and feel like CM on any other device, and more importantly, it should follow our release schedules (which is a “when it’s ready” kind of thing, but we do plan our final/RC releases when we feel it’s ready). Most importantly, no major hardware functionality should be broken.
We want to see CM available for every device out there, and our infrastructure (and our developer community) is there for anyone to use. We spend a lot of time making new releases of Android backward-compatible with devices that are not ready for them, and we also spend much time making all of these (sometimes not so pretty) changes co-exist together without breaking other devices. The more eyes on your code, the better it will be.
That said, as much as we’d like it to be, the CMSGS project is not yet an official part of CyanogenMod. There are also a number of other unofficial ports out there which haven’t been submitted to us that we’d love to include. If you’re interested, stop by #cyanogenmod-dev on Freenode. If you didn’t get it from our mirror network or the CM forums, don’t expect it to be up to our standards.
The biggest thing to keep in mind when porting to a new device is to think about how your change is going to affect other devices. This is the biggest reason why we aren’t supporting Samsung devices other than the Nexus S yet. Don’t change hardcoded default values just to suit your device. Use the configuration options available, or add new ones with the original values as defaults. Do a build for another unrelated device after you make your changes (it helps to have another device to test with, of course) and verify it as well. Android was made for this, so do it right.
Like I’ve said so many times before, CyanogenMod is all about the community. And our community can help you too. I’d love to see more of these ports contributed to the project- it’s only going to make things better. We’ve grown from just a mod to what I’d call an “Android distribution” and we need to keep our standards high.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh no, does this mean we're all running unofficial CM ROMs ?
Wait, everything is working fine though... Official, unofficial, pffft
hallstevenson said:
Oh no, does this mean we're all running unofficial CM ROMs ?
Wait, everything is working fine though... Official, unofficial, pffft
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 10 char......
A dev would have to maintain the device and be committed to building it up, like Darchstar was (is?) for the Hero CDMA. It really all depends on the Dev/Devs for the device, for example I've seen Cyanogen say in his twitter that he would also like to see the Dream/Saphhire continue to be developed for but no one has stepped up to maintain it. I can also only imagine that there are some qualifications for someone to maintain a device. Here is a list of the current maintainers for the devices
https://github.com/cvpcs/android_vendor_cyanogen/blob/gingerbread/CHANGELOG.mkdn
Yeah, I can understand that. That's all I was saying, though. If they were doing all of the same work anyway I just thought it would be nice to have. I also didn't know if anyone had pursued this in the past, but seeing as how Conap had already tried I think I'm good with that. I also have no problems running the unofficial ROMs, just so you know. Thanks, guys!
It's not like we just want it to be official... but porting a ROM has its downsides. There's nothing to say devs couldn't take a ROM that is NATIVELY supported for the eris (and not for the hero) and do exactly what they already do... we would just be cutting out work for them and it would definitely effect the end user.
Hungry Man said:
It's not like we just want it to be official... but porting a ROM has its downsides. There's nothing to say devs couldn't take a ROM that is NATIVELY supported for the eris (and not for the hero) and do exactly what they already do... we would just be cutting out work for them and it would definitely effect the end user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the way i do it is best for me,,and seems to be going fine,,, the cm7 ports have been alot better then the froyo ,, and alot faster ,, look how long it took the froyo camera to work,, gb the camera works outta the box,,
Hungry Man said:
It's not like we just want it to be official... but porting a ROM has its downsides. There's nothing to say devs couldn't take a ROM that is NATIVELY supported for the eris (and not for the hero) and do exactly what they already do... we would just be cutting out work for them and it would definitely effect the end user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is more than one definition of porting that people are using around here.
1) Porting to an unsupported device = compiling source, building a vendor tree, and getting it to work on said device (This is basically what the CyanogenMod team would do to make it an official build, although they would integrate the changes into the main source. The changes would mostly still be in a separate vendor tree in the repo. And it would be 'official'. From a practical/technical view, what workshed is doing is the same thing that the CM team would do.)
2) Porting an existing build to an unsupported device = taking an existing, already compiled ROM and making it work on said device (This is what tazz is doing with the Heroc build. This works out well when going from the Heroc.)
Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that I have that right.
The only downside that I see from either of these is MAYBE not getting quite the support that we would get if the Eris had an 'official' build. I really don't think it's affecting much of anything, IMHO. It might in the future as the Heroc and Eris become more and more dated devices. But then, many of you won't really care because you're kids will be using them as mp3 players anyway while you use your fancy, new quad core HTC Destroyer 6G. (What's a Beiber?)
gnarlyc said:
There is more than one definition of porting that people are using around here.
1) Porting to an unsupported device = compiling source, building a vendor tree, and getting it to work on said device (This is basically what the CyanogenMod team would do to make it an official build, although they would integrate the changes into the main source. The changes would mostly still be in a separate vendor tree in the repo. And it would be 'official'. From a practical/technical view, what workshed is doing is the same thing that the CM team would do.)
2) Porting an existing build to an unsupported device = taking an existing, already compiled ROM and making it work on said device (This is what tazz is doing with the Heroc build. This works out well when going from the Heroc.)
Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that I have that right.
The only downside that I see from either of these is MAYBE not getting quite the support that we would get if the Eris had an 'official' build. I really don't think it's affecting much of anything, IMHO. It might in the future as the Heroc and Eris become more and more dated devices. But then, many of you won't really care because you're kids will be using them as mp3 players anyway while you use your fancy, new quad core HTC Destroyer 6G. (What's a Beiber?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought it was a girl
tazzpatriot said:
I thought it was a girl
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a dude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zb64y6Nvs0
refthemc said:
Its a dude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zb64y6Nvs0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nope still a girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwIa2S0YQs4
FYI: http://twitter.com/cyanogen/status/45246447385452544
@cyanogen said:
@Algamer we don't officially support the eris, it would be nice if someone doing the porting joined up with us though
about 8 hours ago via web in reply to Algamerhttp://twitter.com/Algamer/status/45235578886815744http://twitter.com/Algamer/status/45235578886815744
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think OUR devs are doing just fine. Why change now?
wildstang83
wildstang83 said:
I think OUR devs are doing just fine. Why change now?
wildstang83
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our devs are doing more than just fine, especially considering the amount of development we STILL have going on even though the Eris was a short-lived device that was EOL'd after like 8 months, was mid-range compared to the original Droid, and is a pretty niche device being MDPI on Verizon...
Why change now? That's a good question and I don't have a great answer. Like some have said on this post, maybe we'll get more support with bugs, etc. Additionally, a lot of the users here on XDA are looking for consistency. Since many who read and post here lack the skill set to do any meaningful ROM development themselves, they rely on the kindness of willing devs. However, devs will often add their own "personal touches" to their ROMs, which is great and well within their right to do. Having said that, many users are just looking to for something where they know, "Oh OK, so this is the base CM ROM that's officially distributed."
Personally, I don't care whether we have an "official" CM build or not for the Eris. I'm pretty reserved when it comes to ROMs for everyday use and am still using xtrSENSE as my default. The only reason I posted up cyanogen's recent tweet was to show that cyanogen himself is well-aware of the Eris development, is personally following the Eris ports, and is open to a partnership. My hope is that, by bridging communication, I am doing my part in helping to expose any possible mutual benefit (Eris XDA devs, ROM end-users, and Team Douche at CM) that could be gained by considering an "official" build. Ultimately, I understand that this is a decision that can only be made by the devs and also, not fulling understanding ROM development or having the skill set myself, I believe they are in the best position to make that decision. Like I said, I'm merely acting as a messenger, bringing this communication to light on our forum.
Related
Sorry if this has already been posted.
I apologize for not keeping the site up to date, I’m a slacker We also had a database issue and lost the last post about 6.0′s release, if you were wondering why it went missing.
6.1 is the current work-in-progress and is coming together nicely. There’s a few new features like touch-to-focus in the camcorder, dismiss notifications by swiping, kernel updates for most devices, and improved performance. There will also be support for a few new devices- Acer Liquid, HTC Wildfire and Samsung Vibrant. My eye is also on the new HTC phones that are about to get released like the G2.
A lot of people ask me about adding support for their phone, but we can only support phones that we actually own. The CM team is always looking for new hackers to join up with us to add support for their favorite device. Get in touch with me if you’d like to help.
CyanogenMod is open source. The quality of code being added to CM has vastly improved because of the code review system that we’ve put in place, Gerrit. It’s the same system used by Google to manage the Android Open Source Project. It allows anyone to submit code to the project in a highly-visible way and gives us a way to examine and improve it before it’s actually merged. We want your code, so send us your patches. If there’s something you don’t like, change it.
Nightly builds of CM are always available if you’re brave and want to try out the latest code. If you’re running nightly builds, the best way to stay up to date on new changes is to follow @cmsrc on Twitter.
Our user base is approaching a quarter of a million users. This project has come a long way Thanks for all the support, we are only as strong as the community!
Source- Cyanogenmod.com
Porting a vibrant rom to the captivate is not hard
no wayyyy this is finally coming to our cappy, i'd be beyond happy
Hate to sound like a douche, but is there anything in there (besides maybe some of the features of CM6.1) that we havent known for a long time? No release date, we know thier working on it, and we know they are working with the vibrant.
Well if you look here it still shows as in progress for version 6.0...They have said in the past that the vibrant won't be supported till 6.1 and then someone will still have to port it to the captivate..
https://spreadsheets.google.com/lv?key=0Aledx886TFpZdHdwNzNKZzJLczJjTnA5ekFWRzNxX2c&hl=en&authkey=CNf7ie8G
So I don't think we will be seeing anything soon...
so, i'm sure everyone will get a good laugh, because everyone talks about how this is the best thing about to come since sliced bread........
but what is SO great about this?
buddy17 said:
so, i'm sure everyone will get a good laugh, because everyone talks about how this is the best thing about to come since sliced bread........
but what is SO great about this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Froyo! Plus lots of custom stuff.
well i knew it was based on 2.2....but the "custom stuff" is what i meant. What are some of the big things it does that are so great
I'm new to the whole Android scene so excuse my ignorance but can someone explain how CM6.1 can possibly be put on a GalaxyS phone when there is no source code for the kernel?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
sdotbrucato said:
I'm new to the whole Android scene so excuse my ignorance but can someone explain how CM6.1 can possibly be put on a GalaxyS phone when there is no source code for the kernel?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The other custom roms seem to use the 2.1 kernel.
I checked that spreadsheet about 3 weeks ago, and it was still in development like it is now for the vibrant.
buddy17 said:
well i knew it was based on 2.2....but the "custom stuff" is what i meant. What are some of the big things it does that are so great
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not really about a wealth of extra features. Cyanogenmod has extra configurability. In addition it is a bit more cohesive than typical roms. I definitely preferred it over the stock Nexus One rom and the stock nexus one rom is better than stock Captivate.
The rapid updates and support is enough for me to use Cyanogenmod.
z28james said:
The other custom roms seem to use the 2.1 kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But 6.1 is Froyo, all the ROMs I've seen are Eclaire... How are they using a 2.1 kernel with Froyo?
I was under the impression the reason for no Froyo ROMs on the Captivate was due to lack of source from Samsung?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Who needs this when we have cognition?!
designgears said:
Who needs this when we have cognition?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly
designgears said:
Who needs this when we have cognition?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i'm sure when this comes out you'll be able to strip the FroYo out of it and make it your own, and better
CM6.1 will come to the captivate after is released to the vibrant, kernel differences are minimal between the two so porting CM6.1 to the captivate will only require few kernel changes.
yeah i'm sure the port will be done in the time it takes to heat up a pop tart.
designgears said:
Who needs this when we have cognition?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 Finally got my Cappy right where I want it. CM is awesome, I'm just tired of all the hype, not to mention the waiting for this stuff to happen.
designgears said:
Who needs this when we have cognition?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone who is waiting to use Voice Actions, Chrome-to-phone, and any other cool 2.2-only apps.
Yeah, like real Flash or having the speed boost of the JIT compiler.
Is there a reason why the dev community cannot get behind cyanogenmod and still get donated to? Is there some kind of politics involved that will not allow this relationship? I just think I would like to see the effort into one project that is solid, without all the themes and "personal" touches you see with everything else.
In a word it doesnt seem like much progress is being made, except for some screenshots from the dude and an alpha build from eugene. If Eugene, Som, Codeworkxs thedudesandroid, and the rest of the vibrant devs worked on a gingerbread based cyanogenmod, it would benefit everyone.
Move me, flame me, just dont one line answer me.
Yours to change and modify:
https://github.com/CyanogenMod
Ideologies differ. Work ethics differ. I think a move like this would be destined to fail.
Have you personally experienced both Macnut and Nero? Both ROMS are outstanding. I think the more fragmented the ROMS are, the more ideas, experiments, and innovation will occur. I think to push devs to a single common platform would be both stifling and detrimental to the android modding community as a whole.
Besides, all the devs have the same problem... Drivers. Until we start seeing Gingerbread leaks, all devs would have the same stumbling block anyway, whether they are working as one, or separately.
i'm fairly certain all CM ROMs have been halted and work has been pushed to CM7.0 Gingerbread based. With the Nexus S (NS) being the same thing with a few minor difference to all the other SGS phones and the NS source being openly available for people, we should see a true Gingerbread CM ROM for all the SGS phones once they figure out the necessary changes to make our variants work. This time it should be easier, thanks to all the Devs who came before and figured out Samsung's ass-backwards way of doing things.
Time and patience will reward with the greatest Android ROM the world has ever seen!
angryPirate12 said:
i'm fairly certain all CM ROMs have been halted and work has been pushed to CM7.0 Gingerbread based. With the Nexus S (NS) being the same thing with a few minor difference to all the other SGS phones and the NS source being openly available for people, we should see a true Gingerbread CM ROM for all the SGS phones once they figure out the necessary changes to make our variants work. This time it should be easier, thanks to all the Devs who came before and figured out Samsung's ass-backwards way of doing things.
Time and patience will reward with the greatest Android ROM the world has ever seen!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This makes me moist.
d33dvb said:
Is there a reason why the dev community cannot get behind cyanogenmod and still get donated to? Is there some kind of politics involved that will not allow this relationship? I just think I would like to see the effort into one project that is solid, without all the themes and "personal" touches you see with everything else.
In a word it doesnt seem like much progress is being made, except for some screenshots from the dude and an alpha build from eugene. If Eugene, Som, Codeworkxs thedudesandroid, and the rest of the vibrant devs worked on a gingerbread based cyanogenmod, it would benefit everyone.
Move me, flame me, just dont one line answer me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my question for you, is why does it have to be cyanogenmod? Youre asking all devs to collaborate to come up with one big super-ROM, yet it will still only be under the name of one developer, Cyanogen?? This doesnt make much sense.
So basically what youre asking is, since you PERSONALLY would prefer to run cyanogenmod on your phone, you want all other Vibrant devs to concede their own projects to assist your personal favorite developer with his project??
Why doesnt CM help with a new Team Whiskey ROM?? If your answer is because CM is more popular and has more development-power in the Android world, then you have answered your own question in regards to the "politics" that may be behind it.
I feel a lot of people (not necessarily the OP) just seek the "cyanogenmod" title to their ROM, without even really knowing what it is. They just hear the name thrown around all over the place and want to feel like they are in the loop; which is just mindless, in my opinion.
Its great to have several devs, with several different projects. It gives the average user (non-dev) options, and different things to choose from and try.
If you went to a car show, and every car had the same exact engine in it, what would be interesting in that??
what a communist suggestion
I, personally, love that there are many diff ROM's to choose from. I love having that variety. I prefer <tw> ROM's, just because they theme it pretty much how I would theme a ROM (and they scream), If I was even remotely capable of Dev'ing. Eugene makes an awsome ROM too, But not to my personal taste. On my G1 I always used cm ROM's, but the way they work at this point that's not possible for a Vibrant. So I guess what I'm saying is, I'm glad they're not all concentrating on one ROM because we would still be waiting... stuck with RFS !
I just want that Cyanogen bluetooth stack on a regular (sans Touchwiz) Galaxy S rom with TV out. The Bluetoouth stack is the only reason why I am using Cyanogen outside of the speedy OS.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
I get what you mean but I have to say that I love flashing different devs roms & kernels, I would hate to be slave to one idea...I could have gone iOs for that.....get it iOs 4! I kill myself sometimes...
vibrant
GingerR2JL4
TopShelf10 said:
my question for you, is why does it have to be cyanogenmod? Youre asking all devs to collaborate to come up with one big super-ROM, yet it will still only be under the name of one developer, Cyanogen?? This doesnt make much sense.
So basically what youre asking is, since you PERSONALLY would prefer to run cyanogenmod on your phone, you want all other Vibrant devs to concede their own projects to assist your personal favorite developer with his project??
Why doesnt CM help with a new Team Whiskey ROM?? If your answer is because CM is more popular and has more development-power in the Android world, then you have answered your own question in regards to the "politics" that may be behind it.
I feel a lot of people (not necessarily the OP) just seek the "cyanogenmod" title to their ROM, without even really knowing what it is. They just hear the name thrown around all over the place and want to feel like they are in the loop; which is just mindless, in my opinion.
Its great to have several devs, with several different projects. It gives the average user (non-dev) options, and different things to choose from and try.
If you went to a car show, and every car had the same exact engine in it, what would be interesting in that??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. It seems to be the "you want what you can't have" theory. It's going to be funny when there is finally a CM ROM and all these same ppl that wanted it are going to wonder why CM is so plain looking and isn't themed up. It's an endless cycle. CM offers support to multiple devices, which gets their name out there. But I can promise you if you've ran ROMs such as Nero + voodoo, even the best running CM isn't going to "blow it away" in performance, maybe some fun features, but that'll about do it.
I'm satisfied with TWs stuff. All I'm hoping for is that we can get drivers written to do our own ASOP roms, so we can one day have 2.3 and beyond.
im curious about this as well and being that i have no clue, i feel completely authorized to put in my .02 that i thought the primary reason we dont have cm for the galaxy was due to lack of aosp/drivers...
LOL, you sad bunch of folks think I have never flashed a rom on the vibrant? Sure I have, but they are all roms based off of samsuck files, with a theme pushed on top. This requires some skill and understanding, but it does not make you a "ROM D3V"
I am not in any way trying to push everyone to cyanogenmod, I am trying to get the "real devs" to work on things like GPS drivers and such as a whole, to benefit everyone, you think the tricks we learn as a group you cannot then use as an individual? You cannot say I am communist (lmao) because I want the devs to work together, I suppose that what people say about XDA is true, the users who are flaming me make it unbearable to have a real conversation. I mean just look there are several "FANBOY" posts already, and we are on post 13. No wonder the real devs ficking hate XDA. The sole reason I personally like cyan is because of the testing that it goes through, to make sure embarrassing bugs dont happen often. He has developed a rom for my G1, then both my Mytouch's and just miss running it on my vibrant, thats all. My G1 is sitting here running CM 6.1.0 and my phone still sits here on Ginger Clone, the best there is right now.
FYI when there was lack of drivers on the Dream/Magic someone re-wrote them, mmkay?
It has always seemed that the devs share fairly well. While they don't work together on one project, they share what is needed and form teams of likeminded people to push out better and better products. If you want to see what happens when you get everyone together and make them all focus on one big new release look at samsung itself. These small teams can operate with greater freedom to build and release mods and roms as they see fit. Xda is about sharing info and improving our machines. Would we really want to have gingerbread today without all the options and flavors that different dev teams put together. If you say yes, that's fine, but I like the variety and am happy to wait for what's next.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Moved of: Samsung Vibrant > Vibrant Android Development
To: Samsung Vibrant > Vibrant General
CM is not really comparable to the XDA devs' ROMs. CM is a complete ground-up build from AOSP. Nero, Macnut, etc are not; they are mods of existing unofficial Samsung ROMs. (Not to imply that Eugene/Sombionix et al's work is anything less than quality).
mindaika said:
CM is not really comparable to the XDA devs' ROMs. CM is a complete ground-up build from AOSP. Nero, Macnut, etc are not; they are mods of existing unofficial Samsung ROMs. (Not to imply that Eugene/Sombionix et al's work is anything less than quality).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that's the thing. The skill set involved in getting AOSP (and the rest of CM) building properly is a different skill set than modifying a Samsung released ROM.
The approaches are almost entirely opposite - whereas most ROMs here take what the vendor provides and replace the junky bits with stuff that works better, the AOSP-based ROMs such as CM start from a bare bones google source repository that never had any of that junk to begin with.
Both approaches have their merits. As should be obvious by now, the former results in much more rapid progress since you can start right away with a working build from Samsung. The latter approach can take substantially longer, since you don't have a working base to start from (especially with a device like the SGS, which has hardware very different from most CM-supported devices).
Eugene had an AOSP 2.1 rom pretty well built. Needed some kinks worked out, but there didn't seem to be a lot of interest because all everyone wanted was froyo. I'm sure we're probably see at least a couple of AOSP efforts if/when froyo officially drops.
angryPirate12 said:
i'm fairly certain all CM ROMs have been halted and work has been pushed to CM7.0 Gingerbread based. With the Nexus S (NS) being the same thing with a few minor difference to all the other SGS phones and the NS source being openly available for people, we should see a true Gingerbread CM ROM for all the SGS phones once they figure out the necessary changes to make our variants work. This time it should be easier, thanks to all the Devs who came before and figured out Samsung's ass-backwards way of doing things.
Time and patience will reward with the greatest Android ROM the world has ever seen!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, codeworkx and the CMSGS team have stopped worked on 6.1 and (along with Supercurio and others) are working on an AOSP Gingerbread port for SGS.
It makes sense--no point in continuing to try to build a 2.2 without source when the 2.3 source is already out.
Hello,
This was brought up in another thread that is now locked.This post asked the question.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11287492&postcount=40
and this is the blog post by Cyanogen
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/a-note-on-unofficial-ports-and-how-to-get-it-right
From what I can make from the blog post that Cyanogen put up on the CM website the Epic 4g as well as the other Galaxy S CM ports are not backed by Cyanogen because they do not go through the normal chain of how they add their code into their source code tree.The Galaxy S CM github has many changes to the stock android code that could possible and probably does break the code from being compiled for other phones. The framework is modified to work with the Samsung RIL that our phones use. The CM team will make additions to the stock android code not modifiy the stock code itself. So from my understanding of thing this is why Cyanogen does not consider what the CMSGS team has done as a part of the mainline CM code base. I believe this goes for all the Galaxy S phones not just the Epic.
Does being backed by the CM team make it get done any quicker? If so....
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Being backed by the Cm team would definitely speed up the porting process, Cyanogen had the Evo Release Client up and running in a little over a month without source
So its a matter of pulling the source together and prperly placing it into their source control so their build bot can properly dov what build bots do...build...then CM helps with the port process?
If I think I'm following that right...somone better start uploading code to Cyanogens t&c's(terms and conditions) so we can have some epic awesomesauce.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Most importantly, no major hardware functionality should be broken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Poryhack said:
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but there is code that is changed in the Galaxy S port that doesn't get changed at all in other CM ports as far as I know.
If we had HTC Epic's instead of Samsung Epic's and still identical devices... CM would officially support the Epic.
Period. They can say whatever they want but we all know this to be the case. You can't tell me Samsung changes their code that much more then HTC... last I checked Sense was a much more in depth overall to the underlying OS then Touchwiz is.. but maybe not.
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Thanks for osting this skeeter
Android Creative Syndicate- From spontaneous ingenuity, comes creative brilliance
063_XOBX said:
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The changes in the code have nothing at all to do with the cpu its all for the radio which even having froyo source will not help a bit with.Its all in the way the code changes were done. Rather then adding to the base code in CM the code was directly changed which is what Cyanogen has an issue with doing so basically could and probably has broken the radio code for other cdma phones, I don't know what or if any of the code in the frameworks was changed for the gsm Galaxy S phones so I can't say for sure that it the source from the CMSGS github wouldn't work on another GSM phone I only know that changes were made to get it working on the Epic and Fascinate.I don't think what the CMSGS team did was wrong they did what they had to do to get things working and from the time I spent working on it it didn't seem like there was much input from the CM team at all but that was probably happening in another irc channel that I was not invited into if they were involved.I was hoping that the Galaxy S would have had more interest from the CM team as a whole I know a phone or two was collected and donated to at least one dev and i also heard that Koush was supposed to take over the Captivate port of CM I am not sure if that ever happened or not but the Epic and Fascinate were from the beginning the red headed step children of the Galaxy S line it really is too bad that there wasn't for developers around to help work on it and make an offical Cyanogen backed CM port.I blame it all on the Evo personally if the Epic came out first it would be the Epic sporting all the kernel and roms that you can find in the Evo forum instead we are left with a handful or less of devs and a phone that is far from the potential that it has.
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where's the thank spam? hah.
I've slowly been dipping myself into the Developer 'pool' for the epic if you will..and at first when I started working nobody really ever helped out..they just threw me a link and was like..start reading blah blah blah..
Reading only gets you so far; Imho you learn better when you've got the experience of working first hand with the material you're trying to learn.
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When it comes to working on CM most of the work that needs to be done is all coding which we have very few if anyone java coders. Also you can use extract-files.sh on a phone running straight DK28 to get the propietary files needed to build CM with.When it comes to everything else most of the devs have taught themselves how to do the things they so by trial and error and alot of reading the internet. I know I have little coding skill so its would be hard to teach someone something you don't know how to do yourself and alot of the other things like putting togther device files to build android even on the google site has no real information on how to do it at all the best way I think is to just compare what the other phones use and piece it together from that.
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can see its not that Cyanogen doesn't want to support the galaxy s devices its that it seems they don't give any input to the devs that are working on CM for the galaxy s. They have basically split off from the main CM source tree itself and run their own source tree. It seemed like (and this is from the limited amount I saw on irc) that there was no input from the CM team they just let them work on their own. CM has ways to setup the code so the source tree remains workable across the board on all the devices it supports, the cmsgs team has just taken a different route on things and gone their own route thus making it not backed by cyanogen, was it the right way to do it who knows but it has made all the galaxy s devices redheaded step children in the eyes of Cyanogen and the CM team as a whole by the looks of it. I know from the point of view of having an Epic the major hold up to it is having coders with the proper skills to do the coding in general we had one coder working on it I don't know if he is still involved or not at this point. All I know is to make is a backed by Cyanogen CM port the coding that has been done so far would have to be completely redone in the ways that the rest of the CM team adds code to the CM source tree with as little to no modification of the stock CM code as possible.
Also I would like to add that I am not trying to put anyone down that is working on the CMSGS team they have done CM working on these devices and am in no way bad mouthing the work that has been done. This is just my view on things and why Cyanogen doesn't back the galaxy s CM ports.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Its the time taken to port a phone, combined with the number of phones above yours on their list. The fact is they have a list of other phones they feel like investing their time in over the galaxy s line in general which is even more of a reason all knowledge of development on the Epic should be layed out even in pieces like the rest of the information here. Honestly thinking "leak it to noobnl, then we'll get all the goods" isn't going to cut it. Java coders, ubuntu fanatics who have compiled a few apps, and new people willing to learn should be putting heads together compiling new ****. If we dont start a group effort of making a bone stock aosp froyo altering the existing drivers were not going to be much further with source code. And it should be layed out here irc dont work for everyone.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
acer1096xxx said:
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
theimpaler747 said:
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
acer1096xxx said:
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we also have 'limited functionality' w/ 2.1 as far as the phone's full capability.
2.2 will unlock some hidden potential IMO. Could be the reason why all the hubbub to 'wait for 2.2'.. again, just speculating.
Last night, +Steve Kondik took to twitter to vent a little bit:
"CM has been getting a lot of crap lately for taking so long with a release. Guess what? It's not that easy. We don't just call something stable unless we mean it. *Also, RC1 is soon!* The most stable devices will get the RC first. The system we've put in place should allow other devices to catch up quickly. More details later this week "
Now to combat the obvious questions:
# As Steve stated, this will not be for all CM9 supported devices. The Nexus S and Galaxy Nexus can be considered safe bets, but the final list won't be available until release day.
# As always, the proper day of release is difficult/impossible to predict, but we anticipate a code freeze going in place tomorrow at the earliest.
# Yes, this means we will actively be running two separate RC phases (CM7 and CM9). Bug's should be reported to the issue tracker once the release is made, not in the comments on our posts.
# There has been a lot of talk surrounding Linaro in CM. While CM 9.0 won't ship with all the patches on gerrit, quite a few of them are already incorporated and others are sane enough that they will likely be there. There are still some issues surrounding the updated gcc used for the Linaro patches that don't play nice with AOSP.
# Nexus One: For the time being, the N1 will not be supported. We can get it to build/boot/run, but the hacks required break Google's CTS, so until that is rectified, you won't see any build with CM's official stamp of approval.
CM9 News
And from a followup a few hours later:
******
+Ricardo Cerqueira sat down with XDA recently for a developer interview
To piggy back on our comment about the N1 and CTS, Ricardo describes why we don't just shrug off that requirement.
Because it opened a can of worms that can’t be closed again. Getting it to work needed some very ugly workarounds that directly go against Google’s compatibility document for ICS. An app developer targeting ICS as a minimal version for his apps has the right to expect some functionality to be guaranteed on a device that claims to be ICS, that wasn’t (and isn’t) true for ICS builds with these hacks. That’s one the main reasons CM9 does not officially include a bunch of devices that are “working.”
...and some users understand that, but a lot don’t, and they’ll submit error reports on those apps, or they’ll rate it badly at the Play store. This is not a hypothetical scenario, it has happened whether we like it or not, asked for it or not, CM’s userbase is large enough to matter, even if you don’t count derivatives. We have a responsibility not to cause that kind of grief to app developers and we did. With all the mostly bull**** talk about fragmentation, we actively contributed to a break in the platform, no matter how small. That’s not a good thing :X People SHOULD know these builds contain hacks, but you’ve surely realized by now that they don’t
******
dookie23 said:
....so until that is rectified, you won't see any build with CM's official stamp of approval.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so.... is that ever gonna get rectified
charlie_su1986 said:
so.... is that ever gonna get rectified
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wonder what are the hacks he mentioned in the post. Was it the hboot hack, m2sd hack or swap partition...etc?
what is all the fuss about CM9 not releasing a rom officially when we have quite a few talented devs that have already given us the choice of running a near perfect ICS Rom on our nexus one?
EDIT: BCM offers CM9 features, AOKP offers us users the choice of AOKP features and texasice rom has a twist of its own features to. I do not see a problem with CM not releasing an official rom
Kannibalism said:
what is all the fuss about CM9 not releasing a rom officially when we have quite a few talented devs that have already given us the choice of running a near perfect ICS Rom on our nexus one?
EDIT: BCM offers CM9 features, AOKP offers us users the choice of AOKP features and texasice rom has a twist of its own features to. I do not see a problem with CM not releasing an official rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get me wrong, I love seeing the talented devs make awesome progress on kang'ing CM9 and things are coming together nicely. What I am getting at is not whether Cyanogenmod is releasing a CM9 rom officially for the Nexus One, but it's what Ricardo Cerqueira said about the hacks breaking Google CTS. This could mean that apps might not run or worse yet, FC's for no reason.
Now, the real questions are, what are these hacks Ricardo was talking about and is that gonna get rectified?
the hacks they talk about could be small stuff like ta camera fix etc since vendors do not always release new drivers.I would say that the nexus one is using a few hacks for drivers in order to make everything work better
I suspect it's a combination, both messing with HBOOT partition sizes (which is not a *bad* thing, but involves a lot more risk than just flashing a new ROM) and the nasty driver hacks that the poor dev's have had to do to try to working around the lack of a Broadcom driver, since they saw fit to release neither a driver nor sufficient documentation. It's hard to see how either could be overcome for an "official" CM9 release. I feel like it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem; with sufficient dev attention things could probably be brought into acceptable shape, but unofficial ports will never have sufficient dev attention.
Disclaimer: I really appreciate all the work that's been done by everyone on all the community ROMs. It's a hard, often thankless job, whether you're debugging mystery driver issues on an older phone or trying to coordinate a release for dozens of different devices with angry, impatient fans. While I'd love to have an official, flawless ICS ROM, at least we get more love from the community than we did from Google
decoherent said:
I suspect it's a combination, both messing with HBOOT partition sizes (which is not a *bad* thing, but involves a lot more risk than just flashing a new ROM) and the nasty driver hacks that the poor dev's have had to do to try to working around the lack of a Broadcom driver, since they saw fit to release neither a driver nor sufficient documentation. It's hard to see how either could be overcome for an "official" CM9 release. I feel like it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem; with sufficient dev attention things could probably be brought into acceptable shape, but unofficial ports will never have sufficient dev attention.
Disclaimer: I really appreciate all the work that's been done by everyone on all the community ROMs. It's a hard, often thankless job, whether you're debugging mystery driver issues on an older phone or trying to coordinate a release for dozens of different devices with angry, impatient fans. While I'd love to have an official, flawless ICS ROM, at least we get more love from the community than we did from Google
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this post i would put the blame on google for not pushing the vendors for the broadcom drivers since android is open source after all but once again great works by our devs and thanks for letting us experience the latest versions of android on our devices
EDIT: i must admit that i have better devices to use than the nexus one but the community keeps me coming back for more
Sent from my Nexus One using xda premium
Would it be as simple as compiling cyanogenmod for a new phone? We have official builds for my phone (lg Optimus g), and various other AOSP based projects. The main reason I am asking is I have compiled cyanogenmod night lies before, and this looks very interesting so I want to try to get it working on my phone.
evodev said:
Would it be as simple as compiling cyanogenmod for a new phone? We have official builds for my phone (lg Optimus g), and various other AOSP based projects. The main reason I am asking is I have compiled cyanogenmod night lies before, and this looks very interesting so I want to try to get it working on my phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is
XpLoDWilD said:
It is
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a quick question,will it support mediatek devices?
s.sawrav said:
Just a quick question,will it support mediatek devices?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.
We have early support for the r819.
I hope OmniROM is also meant for devices with low specs like for my Xperia U. I am interested to try it as a user.
Mayank7795 said:
I hope OmniROM is also meant for devices with low specs like for my Xperia U. I am interested to try it as a user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have a working AOSP, it should be available without problems.
@XpLoDWilD
Would it be worth me attempting to build this for the tf700, or do you guys have plans for it?
Cheers
What about devices that have CM10 only?
lozohcum said:
What about devices that have CM10 only?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need at least an unofficial CM 10.2 / AOSP 4.3.
JoinTheRealms said:
@XpLoDWilD
Would it be worth me attempting to build this for the tf700, or do you guys have plans for it?
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Building is always worth an attempt...
I used to build my own CM, i'm gonna try to build my own omni too but i'm struggling. I must be doing something wrong with the repo init but I can't seem to find what... I'm gonna update my buildbot first because it's been awhile, and maybe try again tomorrow.
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
lozohcum said:
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why its worth scrawling through XDA, going through guides and learning to dev. Nothing wrong with a dev who decides to leave an older version for a newer version. They're doing it for fun and free.
lozohcum said:
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually have a plan about getting legacy devices involved in the form of a "legacy branch" complete with legacy maintainers. It's tricky to get started off, but might prove useful for anyone wanting to get longer community support for their devices.
pulser_g2 said:
I actually have a plan about getting legacy devices involved in the form of a "legacy branch" complete with legacy maintainers. It's tricky to get started off, but might prove useful for anyone wanting to get longer community support for their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as there is no hard reason to stop supporting a device and we have someone who is taking care of that device we will try
On the other side - there is constant evolution which sometimes will make it necessary to leave a device "behind" if the effort will become too large
Sent from my Find 5 using xda app-developers app
XpLoDWilD said:
It is
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not quite yet... Not until we have roomservice up and running.
(For those that didn't understand what I said - roomservice is the part of CM's repo management system that will automatically sync a device tree and all dependencies. roomservice is HEAVILY dependent on github's APIs, so we couldn't even start work on that particular piece of infrastructure until the project went public.)
lozohcum said:
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason for the Nexus/Xperia Z support is because the vendors have AOSP source for pretty much the entire device readily available. The Xperia Z series (Z, Z Tab, Z1) have source widely available for (IIRC) pretty much everything bar the radio. Heck - sony had uploaded AOSP 4.3 sources before CM had 10.2 nightlies running, from memory.
Anything beyond that boils down to porting existing patches, or people bringing up other devices. This will generally happen for more widely used devices first simply because there's more likely to be someone available with the skills to do it. By the sounds of Omni is working, you could have pretty much any obscure old phone but if you're happy to do the bringup then it'll get added
M.
mattman83 said:
The reason for the Nexus/Xperia Z support is because the vendors have AOSP source for pretty much the entire device readily available. The Xperia Z series (Z, Z Tab, Z1) have source widely available for (IIRC) pretty much everything bar the radio. Heck - sony had uploaded AOSP 4.3 sources before CM had 10.2 nightlies running, from memory.
Anything beyond that boils down to porting existing patches, or people bringing up other devices. This will generally happen for more widely used devices first simply because there's more likely to be someone available with the skills to do it. By the sounds of Omni is working, you could have pretty much any obscure old phone but if you're happy to do the bringup then it'll get added
M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone should write a definitive guide about converting CM10 device tree to AOSP JB device tree, so more people can work on devices maintenance
pulser_g2 said:
I actually have a plan about getting legacy devices involved in the form of a "legacy branch" complete with legacy maintainers. It's tricky to get started off, but might prove useful for anyone wanting to get longer community support for their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope the Acer IconiaTAB A5000 will get supported.
Please, support for RAZR i (x86)
lozohcum said:
Someone should write a definitive guide about converting CM10 device tree to AOSP JB device tree, so more people can work on devices maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Problem is, every device has its own pitfalls. Some are harder to overcome than others.
For example, the lack of NEON in tegra2 combined with the dependency of newer gapps on NEON really screws tegra2 devices, and there isn't much that can be done about it.
Also, in some cases, the things needed to get a device working aren't in the tree, but are in the frameworks to handle OEM-specific oddities (RIL hacking in opt/telephony, which I admit I'm not too familiar with...) or platform support. Sometimes, old devices get left behind simply because their platform overall is a ***** to support beyond a certain point. (See how MSM8660 devices have been lagging lately, due to Qualcomm pretty much sunsetting that chipset.)