19 Oct 2023 |
Licaon_Kter[xmpp] | I've used `built for %s` | 16:07:59 |
FC (they/them) | In reply to @rdfg77:kde.org I thought "targets Android %s+" is good enough for me. it's a bit confusing now I think. "Requires: x86, 12+" makes sense (though maybe should be "Android 12+"). but for the targetsdk it's the OS that requires the APK to have a min target SDK, not the APK requiring x86 or Android 12+. | 21:30:20 |
Sylvia | "Built for an old Android version: %s" maybe? Although that still leaves it implicit. I think it will always be confusing because users don't generally expect old software to not run on new OS, only the other way around | 21:34:36 |
FC (they/them) | In reply to @SylvieLorxu:matrix.org "Built for an old Android version: %s" maybe? Although that still leaves it implicit. I think it will always be confusing because users don't generally expect old software to not run on new OS, only the other way around that still doesn't work after "Requires: ". because that's currently a list of things the APK requires (though the code says it's a list of incompatibility reasons). I think we need to change that to make it work. | 21:36:54 |
FC (they/them) | but yeah. | 21:36:59 |
FC (they/them) | AFAICT al the existing incompatibility reasons were things the APK requires. but this isn't. | 21:37:52 |
Sylvia | Maybe just rephrase "Requires" into "Incompatible" and prefix "Requires" onto every other compat error string | 21:42:20 |
FC (they/them) | something like that, yeah. might get long. | 21:45:52 |
FC (they/them) | ignoring length (and consistency of the incompatibilities) for a sec, "Incompatible: requires x86, requires Android 12+, targets Android 5" seems okay. though doesn't explain why the latter is a problem, not much we can do there sadly. | 21:49:45 |
FC (they/them) | "built for" might be better than "targets" | 21:51:47 |
FC (they/them) | also not sure a comma separated list translates well. | 21:52:59 |
20 Oct 2023 |
linsui | In reply to @obfusk:matrix.org it's a bit confusing now I think. "Requires: x86, 12+" makes sense (though maybe should be "Android 12+"). but for the targetsdk it's the OS that requires the APK to have a min target SDK, not the APK requiring x86 or Android 12+. Then "Requires: x86, Android 12-"? | 05:47:27 |
FC (they/them) | In reply to @rdfg77:kde.org Then "Requires: x86, Android 12-"? that's closer. but still wrong IMO. it's blocked by the OS, the APK itself doesn't actually require a newer version to run. and some ROMs might allow it (or you can use adb). will open a client issue later when not AFK. | 16:27:10 |
21 Oct 2023 |
FC (they/them) | In reply to @obfusk:matrix.org that's closer. but still wrong IMO. it's blocked by the OS, the APK itself doesn't actually require a newer version to run. and some ROMs might allow it (or you can use adb). will open a client issue later when not AFK. https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroidclient/-/issues/2700 | 00:22:50 |
| . . joined the room. | 18:54:40 |
25 Oct 2023 |
| File to bot joined the room. | 15:59:03 |
24 Oct 2023 |
. . | /start@filetobot 86d96ab6_14618924 | 21:08:31 |
26 Oct 2023 |
| booming joined the room. | 11:46:02 |
rando |  Download image.png | 13:15:57 |
rando | waiting for Arabic translation of f-droid website | 13:16:04 |
27 Oct 2023 |
| G joined the room. | 09:27:16 |
| yukoff joined the room. | 18:11:35 |
28 Oct 2023 |
| Pedro Silva joined the room. | 12:25:52 |
Pedro Silva | Why dont have brazilian portuguese in https://hosted.weblate.org/ ?? | 12:27:29 |
linsui | There is Portuguese (Brazil). Isn't that the same thing? | 12:34:28 |
emmapeel | linsui: maybe it would be good to remove Portuguese here: https://hosted.weblate.org/projects/f-droid/fdroiddata/ - although I dont know if that will be pt-pt or pt-br | 14:56:19 |
emmapeel | because the 3 are there | 14:56:32 |
emmapeel | i mean, pt, pt-pt, and pt-br | 14:57:14 |
linsui | If the maintainers of Portuguese agree. I don't know if ssantos and rafaelff in this room. | 14:59:27 |
29 Oct 2023 |
rando | In reply to @basses:matrix.org waiting for Arabic translation of f-droid website ???????????? | 13:22:42 |