<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div><br><br>Sent from my iPad</div><div><br>On 8 Aug 2010, at 18:40, Tiago Marques <<a href="mailto:tiagomnm@gmail.com">tiagomnm@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div class="h5"> > Just killing a random activity is a terrible idea becayse you don't want<br> > your product behaving like it's defective; the pop up idea is way more<br> > acceptable(and a lot better than having the system randomly behaving like<br> > it's crashed). Either way, this is the extremely important use of swap<br> > memory that doesn't exist here. I understand your engineering constraints on<br> > the hardware but randomly killing activities is poised to confuse users and<br> > cause people considering the hardware for deployment to think that you're<br> > selling them something defective/baddly manufactured.<br> <br> </div></div>I tihnk I have been sloppy with my words, so let me clarify two things:<br> <br></blockquote><div><br>I read through the thread but may also missed something.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> - killing processes should be done only to avoid OOM (because<br> currently the kernel kills the wrong thing most of the time).<br></blockquote><div><br>True.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br> - before the need for killing arises, we can do a myriad of things to<br> prepare the user for what is coming and maybe to avoid it (some good<br> ideas have already been posted in this thread).<br></blockquote><div><br>The idea of killing activities with the content closed seems ok but it would probably be a good idea to have a way to opt out of it for some apps. I'm thinking a PDF that may be left open on purpose to serve as reference to something, a browser window, etc. Are you then proposing to use the LRU policy to do the killing? I'm thinking that a popup with a cancel tied to a timeout may be a good idea. Once it is not allowed to be killed, it should not try to again for the session, or at least for a very large increase in query time.<br> Apps like instant messaging(though I don't recall one for Sugar), would definitely need a definitive opt out, no?<br><br>Best regards,<br>Tiago<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br> Regards,<br> <font color="#888888"><br> Tomeu<br> </font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br> > Best regards,<br> > Tiago Marques<br> ><br> >><br> >> This, however, makes non-sugarized activities more dangerous to deal<br> >> with. One more reason to demand proper sugarization.<br> >><br> >> --<br> >>   // Bernie Innocenti - <a href="http://codewiz.org/" target="_blank"><a href="http://codewiz.org/">http://codewiz.org/</a></a><br> >>  \X/  Sugar Labs       - <a href="http://sugarlabs.org/" target="_blank"><a href="http://sugarlabs.org/">http://sugarlabs.org/</a></a><br> >><br> >> _______________________________________________<br> >> Devel mailing list<br> >> <a href="mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org"><a href="mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org">Devel@lists.laptop.org</a></a><br> >> <a href="http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel" target="_blank"><a href="http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel">http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel</a></a><br> ><br> ><br> </div></div></blockquote></div><br> </div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Devel mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org">Devel@lists.laptop.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel">http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>