Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
abielins

Pro1 software: Open source?

Recommended Posts

There are a lot of software developers interested in this phone, including myself! Will the custom keyboard and launcher software be open source? I'd really like to be able to contribute to the community with some pull requests or even just bug reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to get some info on the software for the keyboard for half a year, to give the community some software... Never got any useful info

 

But it turns out that it is actually a standard thing build deep into android.

Controlled in two simple text files

See

https://source.android.com/devices/input/key-layout-files

https://developer.android.com/reference/android/view/KeyEvent

https://source.android.com/devices/input/key-character-map-files

 

It is used by FinQwerty, that works really fine on the Pro1, see http://android.onse.fi/finqwerty/pro1.html.

 

ADD: Using the epp KeyEvent, it can be seen that all keys are standard.

But note that

Left and right Shift seems hardwired in parallel to give KEYCODE_SHIFT_RIGHT

Left and right Ctrl seems hardwired in parallel to give KEYCODE_CTRL_LEFT

Left and right yellow arrow (Fn) are independent but both gives KEYCODE_FUNCTION

Alt key gives KEYKODE_ALT_LEFT

 

The KeyEvent app can not handle the Logo Key

 

(The two key pairs that seems wired in parallel I assume is the reason why they call it a 64 key keyboard, despite it clearly having 66 keys)

 

...And you can use any launcher you choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

…And you can use any launcher you choose.

 

Yes, of course, but if they have nice customizations for landscape use built into theirs (do they?), it would be nice if those features could be easily picked up by other devs and incorporated into those other browsers. Nova isn't bad in landscape, but certainly isn't optimized for it. ;)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

…And you can use any launcher you choose.

Yes, of course, but if they have nice customizations for landscape use built into theirs (do they?), it would be nice if those features could be easily picked up by other devs and incorporated into those other browsers. Nova isn’t bad in landscape, but certainly isn’t optimized for it. ;)

 

I'm sure those that have a preferred launcher currently, is likely to stick with it, if it supports landscape and perhaps keyboard navigation.

 

(I see the added launcher more as a needed patch of poor native Android support, than something offering some fantastic extra functionality)

 

PS It offers the option of launching selected apps on long keypress. A feature I also had on the BB Priv, and never used.

Personally I would have preferred the Windows way of jumping to the first icon matching the typed. (It ignores short press of letters)

I have not spent much time looking for alternative launchers, as they all seem to be more about silly bling, than basic functionality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure I could use any launcher I want, but I want to use the pro1 launcher, and I want to contribute back to the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just guessing, but I'd imagine they'd use something free as a base, like aosp launcher, then modify - not much sense reinventing the wheel. And if thats the case, they are required to provide source under gpl or whatever free license.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Android Open Source Project is licensed under the Apache license, so they don't have to release the modified source code. It would be nice if they did, of course.

What they do need to do is note that they modified the launcher, but not even what they changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ok. I knew kernel worked that way, just assumed all of aosp did, but that makes sense, kernel is linux fork and linux is gpl, thus they have to provide kernel source, but not the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just guessing, but I’d imagine they’d use something free as a base, like aosp launcher, then modify – not much sense reinventing the wheel. And if thats the case, they are required to provide source under gpl or whatever free license.

 

Forgot to reply to this. And yes, I'm quite convinced that it is based on the AOSP Launcher<3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be interested in an open source ROM for the Pro1 to make BT audio HAL tweaks to my specific requirements then rebuild and flash. Sadly what I need is embedded fairly deep into the system and not something easily patchable without rebuilding. I emailed in with some questions a while ago but it probably got lost into the depths of the spam folder.

Maybe I could also try patching in ASHA support when the day for android 10 comes, although I feel that might be a way off for now :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

@EskeRahn Could you check the model number of Pro1 and check if you can find the device from supported Google devices? I could not find "F(x)tec Pro1" or "QX1000" (code used at FCC) anywhere there. I believe Pro1 should be listed as a supported device already since it is realeased a while ago.

https://support.google.com/googleplay/answer/1727131?hl=en

The link says

" If your device isn't listed, it may be newly released "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, EskeRahn said:

The link says

" If your device isn't listed, it may be newly released "

Yeah, I know that. However, even new Nvidia devices are listed there (mdarcy and sif). So the list is definitely updated recently. I am wondering if Pro1 is listed with another name or the certification is still pending. F(x)tec told last month that they are waiting for last certifications to be approved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

Yeah, I know that. However, even new Nvidia devices are listed there (mdarcy and sif). So the list is definitely updated recently. I am wondering if Pro1 is listed with another name or the certification is still pending. F(x)tec told last month that they are waiting for last certifications to be approved.

 

Your guess is as good as mine....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EskeRahn said:

Your guess is as good as mine....

But you can the check the code name from the settings? It should be same that is used at the Google site.

I am just wondering if the latest delay is caused by the missing certificate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

But you can the check the code name from the settings? It should be same that is used at the Google site.

I am just wondering if the latest delay is caused by the missing certificate?

Well if you can not find neither the codename nor the official name on the list, why do you expect I can?? My text search is not better than yours I presume.

It could be a third code name, it could be the list is not updated, it could be the certification is not finalized  - I have no idea, we will need the staff to answer stuff like that....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, EskeRahn said:

Well if you can not find neither the codename nor the official name on the list, why do you expect I can?? My text search is not better than yours I presume.

It could be a third code name, it could be the list is not updated, it could be the certification is not finalized  - I have no idea, we will need the staff to answer stuff like that....

I mean that Pro1 might be listed with another name that can be found from the device settings. You have the prototype device so you can check the code name that is used there in the settings. It might be different than QX1000. Like my Xperia XZ1 Compact says G8441.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

I mean that Pro1 might be listed with another name that can be found from the device settings. You have the prototype device so you can check the code name that is used there in the settings. It might be different than QX1000. Like my Xperia XZ1 Compact says G8441.

It isn't different

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, EskeRahn said:

It isn't different

Thank you for the clarification. Could also check what there is written about Google Play Protect certification?

 

Check your Play Protect certification status

1. Open the Google Play Store app.

2. Tap Menu > Settings.

Under "Play Protect certification," you'll see if your device is Play Protect certified. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, FlyingAntero said:

Thank you for the clarification. Could also check what there is written about Google Play Protect certification?

 

Check your Play Protect certification status

1. Open the Google Play Store app.

2. Tap Menu > Settings.

Under "Play Protect certification," you'll see if your device is Play Protect certified. 

I think I will be overstepping a NDA if I go into such details on license bound stuff without permission. I will (again) refer you to asking the staff

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms