3 ms·
He probably talks about this rejected 2011 patch: http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/5677/ http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/5677/ The first comment reads: "I am
by ce4 13y ago
He probably talks about this rejected 2011 patch: http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/5677/ http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/5677/
The first comment reads:
"I am not sure that this is the direction I want to see CM go.
This will piss off developers, carriers, and probably Google."
- angryasian 13y agoIf you continue reading the thread its primarily because its unfriendly to developers. Seeding dummy data and interfering with developer source of revenue is not something they wanted at the time. Even with this incognito mode, they are attempting to do it in a developer friendly way.
- ce4 13y agoYep, they want to retain the API's semantic as much as possible. BTW, OpenPdroid and similar are even more invasive and unfriendly to developers and revenue (randomize IMEI on each call,etc.). Regarding the pleas to merge this: That patch will definitely not make it into CM. That's also the reason why the original PDroid has been delivered as both a normal patch for the source and as .smali patch for use with apktool to enable easy integration the way autopatcher does.