 We just switched which 1 was which.” It is much more the “eye test.” How we performed in both games gives great cause for concern going forward.
Mangum’s “awesome” game was 209 yards with a poor completion percentage. We almost choked the Arizona game away, too. I was stunned when they kicked off instead of onside kicking it. They had the momentum, and I think we would have lost if they had recovered it. We shouldn’t have been in a nail-biter position with Arizona at that point in the game like we were.
And then, we’re back to 2017 against Cal. Teams watch film and scout. Mangum is going to have to beat teams downfield with his arm, and our run game is going to be stifled. Who anywhere feels good about Mangum lighting up anybody for 400+ yards and a 60%+ completion percentage? Even McNeese St. is going to be like Portland St.: complete defensive lockdown, but struggle to put points on the board.
I think there have been several articles written this week on how BYU fans will be disappointed if they are expecting high scores and 400 yds/passing games. That is the past. Grimes is a control guy more disposed to long grind it out possessions.
I like our D. We should have killed Cal with those 3 turnovers. Our 11 yds in the 3rd accompanied with 4 three and outs murdered us.
different OC’s now. All 3 offenses look bad under Tanners guidance.
We punt too much and have too many three and outs for that kind of LSU offense. If we can do it, great. I don’t think we can. We have to move the ball and score. Especially with our suspect secondary.
People look at him now?
Grimes might be a control guy but Tanner is not.
I think you outlined our one dimensional team under Mangum hits the nail on the head. If you don’t have legs, you better be a wizard with the passing game. Wilson and Hall are great athletes but now is not the time. Just get to the softer side of the schedule before we try that experiment.
As with the BYU football team, there’s no offense here.It takes time and practice. Meditation works wonders but you have to get good at it. You’re using your alcoholic brain and demanding a solution right now this second. Yes, you can do more exercise. You might have to shop around until you find a therapist you click with.  Your replies to people in this thread definitely support this idea. Try and have just a tiny bit of humility. Learning to forgive people is magic.  But if you wanna live a bitter and resentful life go for broke. It eventually causes most alcoholics to relapse.maemo.org Bugzilla – Bug 10870
Open source libsms and libsms-utils
Last modified: 2011-03-01 13:57:29 UTC
You need to
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
What component(s) or source packages/etc is the licensing change request about?
libsms, libsms-utils
What component area is the component in if you know? (See the openness reports
at)
Telephony/Cellular services
What is the current licensing of the component?
L6: Package published under EULA in nokia-binaries
What licensing would you like it to be and why? Examples can be:
open source and openly developed (move to gitorious), open source (select a
license), non-free but redistributable, non-free, published in nokia-binaries,
document the functionality, etc.
At least -dev packages (header files and linkable objects) published and API
documented. Preferably open source and openly developed (move to gitorious).
What project(s) would have benefit from this licensing change request?
Apps to send/receive SMS.
notmynokia.
What technical purpose do you/your project(s) have for wanting the licensing
change?
Libraries provides useful tools for creating, reading and converting SMS
messages including special messages, segmentation and headers and managing
/var/spool/sms/.
notmynokia needs to be able to manipulate the SMS spool.
Resolving as WONTFIX.
The Maemo 5 libraries will not be touched at this point unless there are severe
issues around them. All the new open development related with SMS is
concentrating on the MeeGo OS. The SMS functionality is handled entirely with
open source components. See for more details.
Isn't that actually a reason to open source them now? If they are open source,
the community can fix bugs and add enhancements now that Nokia no longer wishes
to do so. They now have no value as IP to Nokia and would be valuable to the
community.
Unless there are some modules which are not owned by Nokia, in which case I can
understand an unwillingness to go to the effort to put in place agreements to
open source them, it seems like this is the right time to open source them.
If the problem is that there are modules not owned by Nokia, can you open
source at least the header files and provide the -dev package? That would
allow the community to, if they felt it important enough, work out how to use
the APIs even without documentation.
I'll ask.
I sent an email to the maintainers asking about the current situation of these
packages and about any discussion ref opening them. Will report here once I get
new information.
I got first answers and I asked new questions. In the meantime I learned some
things.
The recommended way for app developers to handle SMS is through QMessage, part
of the Qt Mobility API.
If you are missing a feature in that open source library you are encouraged to
file a request or propose a patch.
See also
libsms and libsms-utils will be replaced at some point by the corresponding
functionality of oFono. The code currently exists and you are invited to follow
and get involved in the development. See sms and smsutil at;a=tree;f=src;h=b12bd14b2635937f4c6c2c057eaee10d041052a5;hb=HEAD
In the meantime, it looks that some related functionality plans to be provided
by open source components in MeeGo-Harmattan, where oFono is not implemented
yet. I have asked more information about this.
About bugfixing Maemo 5, are there any bugs related to these libraries that are
not being addressed? Relevant enough to go ahead with the work of opening these
components.
More:
In Fremantle the SMS control binds to and uses the ISI protocol. The ISI API
and protocol is open and available at in
If we change the Nokia license of the code to (L)GPL, then SMS drags the modem
control protocol out as well. Otherwise any opening requires more work in the
Cellular stack for no clear benefit.
On the other side, the protocol, messege headers and usage is opened above the
oFono modem plugin. oFono has the isi-modem plugin development started,
although is not fully there yet:;a=tree;f=drivers/isimodem;h=56066a2f14df7983b485c32268a7b9ed1aaa843a;hb=HEAD
Conclusion: we see no benefit introducing changes in the Circuit Switched Data
for Fremantle. The proper work is being done in the oFono project and the
benefit is to contribute full blown SMS support into oFono core for everybody's
benefit.
Resolving as WONTFIX, then.
(In reply to comment #1)
> Resolving as WONTFIX.
>
> The Maemo 5 libraries will not be touched at this point unless there are severe
> issues around them.
There are severe issues: 8347
> All the new open development related with SMS is
> concentrating on the MeeGo OS. The SMS functionality is handled entirely with
> open source components.
This is about getting missing bits fixed in *maemo*. See
I'd say it's not asking for too much to have Nokia share a bit of
documentation, header files, and help, if not entirely opening up source of
these libs and daemons, to get such a basic feature like SMS-CB working in
maemo.
The community once more is willing to fix elementary things that Nokia missed
to implement/support, and it's just politically correct if Nokia helps on that
effort.
I'm requesting to reopen this ticket.
BTW, the existence of ofono and its code should mean that the "we cant release
bits of telephony stack because it exposes details of how to talk to the modem
at low level" argument made in the past is less valid now.“We had planned it so well” – a sentence which we have often heard and probably also frequently used ourselves during the digital transformation process. In other words, developments are occurring at an ever-increasing rate, the market is constantly changing, and we have to keep up the pace. Cloud native is a specialist field which we have considerable experience in but still endeavour to develop further, so joining the Cloud Native Computing Foundation in January 2021 was a logical step for us.
In recent years, Kubernetes has established itself as an open-source system