Find Your Device:
Or Continue to Thread: [ROM][4.3][ CM 10.2.] Unoffici…
19th August 2013, 04:18 PM |#635  
Senior Recognized Developer
Flag Owego, NY
Thanks Meter: 25,461
Donate to Me
Originally Posted by AlienSr1

I have now been using CM for approx. 5 years or so but I've never heard about CTS compatibility in that time, so how long does this already exist? I do know what CTS is though.
Also isn't there a lot of ROMs out there which do not try to match CTS requirements and still do have access to the play store etc.?

Sent from a spaceship.

It's existed since the beginning of time pretty much. It also evolves somewhat as Android evolves. In the past, it was recommended that applications not have direct write access to external storage. The CTS was changed to be that applications must not have direct write access to external storage. (I could be somewhat wrong about the exact wording here, but it effectively said, "camera app shouldn't write to external storage.")

Thing is that as the largest AOSP derivative project, CM attracts more attention from Google than any other project. If a smaller project flagrantly violates the CTS, if they're small, Google may not find out or pay attention. However the CM team has a long history of working with Google - that's how the gapps compromise came to be, among other things. So when a Google engineer says, "This is a really bad idea" - the team listens. (That's why Cornerstone never made it in and you'll never see PA's Halo make it in - these are fundamental violations of the CTS/CDD, and the ways in which they break apps were described quite clearly by Dianne.) Also, I think Google sees CM as leading by example, so if CM starts setting an example that is contrary to Google's goals in a way that breaks the Play Store apps, members of the team will get pinged about it. (For example, someone from Google pinged multiple CM members to make sure no one was going to pull in PA's per-app DPI stuff.)

There's more going on than the DeviceSettings mess, but I'm hoping the other stuff gets resolved more amicably so I'm holding back from discussing it publically at the moment.
The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to Entropy512 For This Useful Post: [ View ]