[SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...

Oleksii Serdiuk contacts at oleksii.name
Fri Jan 10 12:31:11 UTC 2014

Just a suggestion: add a configurable option "Run when minimized" with a
notice that it will consume device power/CPU if it's enabled. Maybe,
this will satisfy Harbour QA.

On 10/01/14 10:01, Martin Windolph wrote:
> Hi,
> another point for me is a possibility to contact the tester.
> A prior rejection reason for an update of my game "Morzyn" was a missing
> menu button (that was absolutely ok, because it leads to bad usability,
> so I included one), my last rejection reason was battery consumption
> when minimizing while the AI players do their move.
> This is intended behaviour, but my game was rejected because it consumes
> 3%-10% CPU while the AI players move (round-based) and the game is
> minimized (measured by top). When the game waits for the players move, I
> don't see it in "top". I love to finish my move, switch to my mail
> folders or read facebook messages while the other 6 AI players make
> their move.
> Another point is that in future I want to include network gaming.
> Therefore I also want it to run in background. The great thing of
> Sailfish OS is that one can simply close an app like in the good old
> desktop days, if you don't want it to consume power.
> So now I have no idea how to react on this and just did nothing, because
> I also have desktop and Android versions to take care of. But I'm not
> happy that the few users of Morzyn can't profit from the fixes of the
> update and have to deal with the version in store.
> Martin
>> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:57:50 +0100
>> From: alci at mecadu.org
>> To: devel at lists.sailfishos.org
>> Subject: [SailfishDevel] Harbour QA process...
> Hi,
> currently, the Harbour QA process is quite frustrating, as problems
> are reported one after the other, with a delay of several days
> inbetween... reminds me of the old time cobol compilators!
> It would be cool if the efforts made by the developper to provide free
> native application were a bit more considered.
> Ok, I'm talking out of frustration, but I had my app rejected first
> because of naming conventions of the app itself (I didn't properly
> read the FAQ, but it is not stated either in the app submission page
> of Harbour), delay of 7 days, then because of rmp file naming
> convention (which I did not find clearly stated except in the
> rejection notification - 5 more days). Now I am waiting for next step
> (2 days for now...)
> I understand this is a lot of work, but what I suggest is :
> - more controls and more information in the app submission page
> (testing the naming conventions of at least the files seems trivial)
> - when doing QA, report all problems at once, not just the first one
> - maybe provide a QA tool so that developpers could do this job and
> let jolla teams concentrate on real QA (power consumption, security
> checks, ...)
> Hope this does not sound too demanding...
> Best regards,
> Franck
>> _______________________________________________
>> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list

With best regards,
Olekii Serdiuk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4813 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.sailfishos.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140110/bf67eda2/attachment.bin>

More information about the Devel mailing list