Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 149
  1.    #21  
    All patches submitted by 3:00pm Central time today have now been included in the webOS-Patches feed. Update your feeds people.
    dBsooner
    WebOS-Internals Member and Developer
    Donations Appreciated!

    Keep up to date with webOS-Patches via Twitter: @dBsooner

    Browse Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal - (Trac)
    Submit New Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal
    Submit Updated Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal
  2.    #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    This will probably help some too.

    http://forums.precentral.net/canuck-...f-creator.html

    Only problem though is what if multiple people submit the same thing?
    Nope. No problem. I verify a patch doesn't exist before I create the package. No worries.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milominderbinder View Post
    Just to be clear, this is only for the patch developers who should be submitting their own patches. Users should not be submitting patches for the developers.

    Right?

    If we see a patch that is not in the feed, we could send a PM to the patch developer asking,

    Would you submit your patch to the webOS-patches feed:
    dBsooner's webOS-Patches Submission Form

    - Craig
    Craig,

    I feel it should be the responsibility of the developer to submit. That being said, I would say it would be ok to go ahead and submit it on behalf of the developer if a reasonable attempt had been made to get the dev to upload with no luck.

    If one is submitted on behalf, you might put a "Note to admins" saying who you are and that you submitted on behalf of.

    Agree?
    Quote Originally Posted by daventx View Post
    Instead of bothering you with another PM dBsooner, i'll write it here..

    I was checking the status of this: http://forums.precentral.net/webos-p...lti-patch.html

    I had submitted it like 5 minutes after you had posted this thread, but nothing on Preware yet. Was there an issue?
    Somehow yours slipped through my fingers last night when I was pushing the fixes. I apologize profusely. It has now been added and is available for download/update in PreWare. Thank you!
    dBsooner
    WebOS-Internals Member and Developer
    Donations Appreciated!

    Keep up to date with webOS-Patches via Twitter: @dBsooner

    Browse Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal - (Trac)
    Submit New Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal
    Submit Updated Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal
  3. #23  
    Oh good that you verify them because I did the first one I submitted wrong. Forgot to put the file name in, thinking it'd pull from the existing file name. Sorry about that.

    If you want to fix it, it's camera-prefs-defaults.json
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    Oh good that you verify them because I did the first one I submitted wrong. Forgot to put the file name in, thinking it'd pull from the existing file name. Sorry about that.

    If you want to fix it, it's camera-prefs-defaults.json

    How did you create the camera-simple-shutter-sound-off patch?

    -Eric G

    WebOS Internals Developer.
    Follow me on Twitter for updates to my projects: | Virtual Keyboard | wIRC | SuperTux | AUPT | KeyBoss | freeTether |

    Donate
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by emoney_33 View Post
    How did you create the camera-simple-shutter-sound-off patch?
    Used Jason's tool that I linked above to make a patch file. I just didn't put the correct "location on device" in so it didn't put the file names in.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    Used Jason's tool that I linked above to make a patch file. I just didn't put the correct "location on device" in so it didn't put the file names in.

    so if I understand correctly, the tool has you input an original file, a modified file and THEN a "location" that is separate?

    -Eric G

    WebOS Internals Developer.
    Follow me on Twitter for updates to my projects: | Virtual Keyboard | wIRC | SuperTux | AUPT | KeyBoss | freeTether |

    Donate
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by emoney_33 View Post
    so if I understand correctly, the tool has you input an original file, a modified file and THEN a "location" that is separate?
    Yeah, it's a Java program, so it's run on the PC and has no idea of the file structure.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    Yeah, it's a Java program, so it's run on the PC and has no idea of the file structure.
    :sigh:

    -Eric G

    WebOS Internals Developer.
    Follow me on Twitter for updates to my projects: | Virtual Keyboard | wIRC | SuperTux | AUPT | KeyBoss | freeTether |

    Donate
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by emoney_33 View Post
    :sigh:
    Other than my mistake of misentering the file name like that, is it doing something else wrong? I know that it's possible to make patches on the Pre itself, but one, I don't know how, and two I try not to install too many packages on my Pre.

    If it's bad to submit stuff done this way, I won't do it, but I thought (again other than the stupid mistake on my part) that it'd be helpful.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    Other than my mistake of misentering the file name like that, is it doing something else wrong? I know that it's possible to make patches on the Pre itself, but one, I don't know how, and two I try not to install too many packages on my Pre.

    If it's bad to submit stuff done this way, I won't do it, but I thought (again other than the stupid mistake on my part) that it'd be helpful.

    Don't get me wrong, it's good that there are alternative methods that some find easier to create patches. It's just that if patches are generated this way, now the header that gives the file being touched is completely user controlled outside of the scope of patching.

    I'm just worried that there will be many future mistakes like this and we will not be able to know what file was meant to be touched. For instance your submission only has the email directory in the header for where the file path should be.

    The tool is a good idea for users that do not know how to create patches but want to submit modifications, I'm just worried about giving the users who don't fully understand patches the responsibility of entering in a file path without any error checking. Maybe supplying a modified file, and path to original file, and then extracting from doctor and generating patch would be a better way. We'll keep an eye on things.

    -Eric G

    WebOS Internals Developer.
    Follow me on Twitter for updates to my projects: | Virtual Keyboard | wIRC | SuperTux | AUPT | KeyBoss | freeTether |

    Donate
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by emoney_33 View Post
    Don't get me wrong, it's good that there are alternative methods that some find easier to create patches. It's just that if patches are generated this way, now the header that gives the file being touched is completely user controlled outside of the scope of patching.

    I'm just worried that there will be many future mistakes like this and we will not be able to know what file was meant to be touched. For instance your submission only has the email directory in the header for where the file path should be.

    The tool is a good idea for users that do not know how to create patches but want to submit modifications, I'm just worried about giving the users who don't fully understand patches the responsibility of entering in a file path without any error checking. Maybe supplying a modified file, and path to original file, and then extracting from doctor and generating patch would be a better way. We'll keep an eye on things.
    Totally understand that. I do understand how important the file path is, just didn't realize exactly what it was looking for at first glance. Though, yeah, won't make the mistake again... and I hope it has the camera directory in the header for where the file path should be, not the email directory.

    You might want to pass the suggestion along to Jason as well, since it's his tool. Again, the post for that is http://forums.precentral.net/canuck-...f-creator.html . I think though that he's planning on incorporating it into webOS Quick Install so he might be planning on that anyway.

    As it is, should I resubmit the fixed version, or can you just this one time fix it with the correct file?

    Should be /usr/palm/applications/com.palm.app.camera/camera-prefs-defaults.json
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    Totally understand that. I do understand how important the file path is, just didn't realize exactly what it was looking for at first glance. Though, yeah, won't make the mistake again... and I hope it has the camera directory in the header for where the file path should be, not the email directory.

    You might want to pass the suggestion along to Jason as well, since it's his tool. Again, the post for that is http://forums.precentral.net/canuck-...f-creator.html . I think though that he's planning on incorporating it into webOS Quick Install so he might be planning on that anyway.

    As it is, should I resubmit the fixed version, or can you just this one time fix it with the correct file?

    Should be /usr/palm/applications/com.palm.app.camera/camera-prefs-defaults.json

    Yea meant camera not email lol :P

    Thanks for notifying us of the mistake And no worries, we'll fix it when we verify it.

    -Eric G

    WebOS Internals Developer.
    Follow me on Twitter for updates to my projects: | Virtual Keyboard | wIRC | SuperTux | AUPT | KeyBoss | freeTether |

    Donate
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by dBsooner View Post
    Somehow yours slipped through my fingers last night when I was pushing the fixes. I apologize profusely. It has now been added and is available for download/update in PreWare. Thank you!
    No need apologize.. its up now. But i got no credit. I've fixed 2 patches so far that have been left sitting around not working for a bit. I obviously have no problem with have the original maintainer on it.. but i'd like to get my name on it in case any more issues arise.
  14. #34  
    Please don't submit other people's patches. Just because a patch is posted and shared freely on a website doesn't suddenly make it open source and the author doesn't give up copyright. While the author is unlikely to object to the help, he or she has the exclusive right to decide how to distribute his or her patches and how they might be modified.
  15. #35  
    No text under icons + 4x4 v3 is awesome.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Just because a patch is posted and shared freely on a website doesn't suddenly make it open source and the author doesn't give up copyright. While the author is unlikely to object to the help, he or she has the exclusive right to decide how to distribute his or her patches and how they might be modified.
    Sorry to say, but it is. From the submission form:

    Please note that all contributions to WebOS Internals are considered to be released under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 (see Project:Copyrights for details). If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.
    Last edited by jhoff80; 10/23/2009 at 05:01 PM.
  17.    #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by daventx View Post
    No need apologize.. its up now. But i got no credit. I've fixed 2 patches so far that have been left sitting around not working for a bit. I obviously have no problem with have the original maintainer on it.. but i'd like to get my name on it in case any more issues arise.
    I again, apologize. I didn't look at the maintainer line that closely. It has now been fixed. You are listed first.

    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Please don't submit other people's patches. Just because a patch is posted and shared freely on a website doesn't suddenly make it open source and the author doesn't give up copyright. While the author is unlikely to object to the help, he or she has the exclusive right to decide how to distribute his or her patches and how they might be modified.
    I am sorry, but I have to disagree here. Patching is 99% open source and even the forum submission form tells you it can and will get used however.

    If you don't want your patch in the webOS-Patches feed, then i would explicitly state that in your original post where the patch file is discussed.

    I highly object to someone wanting to "close source" or "not redistribute" a patch file. It is all open source, that is the point of it. Share and share alike. Make things better and share back.
    dBsooner
    WebOS-Internals Member and Developer
    Donations Appreciated!

    Keep up to date with webOS-Patches via Twitter: @dBsooner

    Browse Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal - (Trac)
    Submit New Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal
    Submit Updated Patches @ WebOS-Patches Web Portal
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by dBsooner View Post
    I am sorry, but I have to disagree here. Patching is 99% open source and even the forum submission form tells you it can and will get used however.

    If you don't want your patch in the webOS-Patches feed, then i would explicitly state that in your original post where the patch file is discussed.

    I highly object to someone wanting to "close source" or "not redistribute" a patch file. It is all open source, that is the point of it. Share and share alike. Make things better and share back.
    I highly object to someone declaring that he will not respect copyright laws for an entire class of software. Do you speak for webos-internals.org when you say that you'll treat everything as open source, even when the author has not explicitly licensed the work as open source? Which open source license have you chosen to apply to patches that have not been licensed as open source?

    Btw, all the software that I distribute as patches will always be free, and I'd be happy for as many users as possible to benefit from my software. But that doesn't mean that any organization can rename and redistribute my software without my permission.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    I highly object to someone declaring that he will not respect copyright laws for an entire class of software. Do you speak for webos-internals.org when you say that you'll treat everything as open source, even when the author has not explicitly licensed the work as open source? Which open source license have you chosen to apply to patches that have not been licensed as open source?
    All submissions to webOS Internals are licensed as open source though. Maybe some people haven't read it prior to submission, but by adding or editing a webOS Internals page, as I mentioned before, you're agreeing to it.
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by jhoff80 View Post
    Sorry to say, but it is. From the submission form:
    I certainly didn't agree to that, and I don't believe I used this submission form, wherever it is.
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions