RE: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Support for non-UEI emulator

[<mika.hoikkala@xxxxxxxxx>]

OK. Good.
 
So immediate problem is solved.
Right?
 
mho


________________________________

	From: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Kevin M
Horowitz
	Sent: 19 October, 2006 15:58
	To: Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
	Cc: dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx; dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
	Subject: RE: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Support for non-UEI emulator
	
	

	With the change Arto made, it is possible again. The problem was
that the Device Manager only searched for UEI compliant devices when you
tried to add a platform. This was a change made between M1 and M2. Now,
the code will try all device managers until it finds one that matches.
So, if you create a device manager, it will now be exercised. The
solution Arto implemented has a lot of limitations, but is a start.
	-----------------------------
	Kevin Horowitz (khorowit@xxxxxxxxxx)
	IBM Software Group - WPLC
	8051 Congress Ave.
	Boca Raton, Fl 33487
	+1-561-862-2113 (t/l 975)
	
	 <mika.hoikkala@xxxxxxxxx>
	
	
	

				<mika.hoikkala@xxxxxxxxx> 
				Sent by:
dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 

				10/19/2006 08:42 AM 
	
	Please respond to
Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
<dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

 

To

<dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>	


cc

	


Subject

RE: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Support for non-UEI emulator	
	 	

	Moi,
	
	Need is clear.
	MTJ have to be extendible so that any (means non-UEI) emulator
can be attached.
	
	What I would like to understand is that why this is not
possible?
	
	But we have also agreed that we are not (as MTJ project)
implementing support for other protocols in our first release, but it
should be possible to anybody else to do it. Although I don't see any
reason why MTJ in general couldn't include support for major non-UEI
emulators.
	
	mho
	
	
________________________________

	From: dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Kevin M
Horowitz
	Sent: 19 October, 2006 15:24
	To: Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
	Subject: Re: [dsdp-mtj-dev] Support for non-UEI emulator
	

	Mika,
	
	It is mandatory because we have always claimed to support any
J2ME library, and by just having UEI, we are limited to MIDP. We have
always agreed that support might be lacking for other libraries, but
that they would work if you built an SDK. This is something that we have
insisted upon during the entire project. We can't limit ourselves to
MIDP for the release. All of our documentation lists that we are capable
of supporting non-MIDP projects.
	
	kevin
	-----------------------------
	Kevin Horowitz (khorowit@xxxxxxxxxx)
	IBM Software Group - WPLC
	8051 Congress Ave.
	Boca Raton, Fl 33487
	+1-561-862-2113 (t/l 975)
	
	 <mika.hoikkala@xxxxxxxxx>
	
	

					<mika.hoikkala@xxxxxxxxx> 
				Sent by:
dsdp-mtj-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 

					10/19/2006 07:42 AM 

Please respond to
Mobile Tools for The Java Platform mailing list
<dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  
To

<dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>	
 
cc
	
 
Subject

[dsdp-mtj-dev] Support for non-UEI emulator	
	 	
	
	Hi, 

	Kevin. 
	I saw you commented that it is mandatory feature to support
non-uei emulators. 
	I generally agree, but would like to get some clarity to the
issue: 
	1) Why it is mandatory to get it to 0.7 release? 
	2) Although generally good requirement, do somebody requested
that? ("Customer") 
	3) In management terms what is the problem to get it in? 

	mho _______________________________________________
	dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
	dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
	https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev
<https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev>
_______________________________________________
	dsdp-mtj-dev mailing list
	dsdp-mtj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
	https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-mtj-dev