Re: Promotion

2010-04-07 Thread Martin Grimme
Hi,

same here, so it might be a general problem with the Diablo promoter.
Besides taking 9 days for the package interface to recognize that a
package has been updated, and then complaining that the package didn't
have a proper description (which it certainly has). The package icon
is not imported, either.
Please somebody look at the Diablo package interface to see what's going wrong.
For information, my stuck Diablo package is 'fmradio-player 2010.03.20-2'.


Regards,
Martin


2010/4/4, George Kibardin george-kibar...@yandex.ru:
 Hi everybody,

 It seems that I missed something. Suddenly I cannot promote the latest
 version of my app from diablo extras-devel to diablo extras. I've read this
 http://wiki.maemo.org/Uploading_to_Extras, tried this
 https://garage.maemo.org/promoter/diablo and still no luck. I see my app in
 extras-devel, but there is nothing like promote button.

 P.S. I see that for Fremantle promotion process is more complex, but I still
 cannot get the idea - what to do to initiate promotion process?

 Best,
 George
 ___
 maemo-developers mailing list
 maemo-developers@maemo.org
 https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Not able to install Hildon Test Automation Framework on N900

2010-04-07 Thread praveen koduru
 Hi ,
I tried the steps suggested in the following link.
http://hildon-test-aut.garage.maemo.org/installation.html

Steps I have tried:

1. Installed all .deb packages as pointed by the above link.

2. arm_for_testing on. executed the command  rebooted

3. Install Dogtail from the above link

   cd dogtail; ./setup.py install
4.  Then tested an example application sniff, which is present in the
dogtail.
- sniff not working
- It throws error
  ImportError: cannot import name checkForA11yInteractively
I enabled Accessibility through gconftool-2 --type bool --set
/desktop/gnome/interface/accessibility true
But still the same error.

I jus tried the following
1. python2.5
 2. import pyatspi
   Traceback (most recent call last):
   File stdin, line 1, in module
   ImportError: No module named pyatspi
I installed python-at-spi_0.6.1-1osso2_armel.deb package from the above
link. but still it is showing no module pyatspi.

All I need is to install dogtail and thus Hildon Test Automation framework
successfully and write some test scripts on N900.
any Help will be greatly appreciated.

-Praveen.
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


ssh uploading to gregale/bora/chinook extras broken?

2010-04-07 Thread Frantisek Dufka

Hello,

I have a problem with upload binary deb to gregale/bora/chinook extras. 
Is this supposed to be working? First I noticed that server key was 
changed so I needed to remove old one from known hosts. And then 
uploading via dput still fails with permisison denied, see below



Permission denied (publickey).
lost connection
Warning: The execution of '/usr/bin/scp' as
  'scp -p 
/scratchbox/users/maemo/home/maemo/scummvm/scummvm_1.1.0_armel.deb 
/scratchbox/users/maemo/home/maemo/scummvm/scummvm_1.1.0_armel.changes 
fano...@garage:/var/www/extras/incoming/gregale'

  returned a nonzero exit code.
Error while uploading.

I have checked my garage account and my ssh key is still there. My 
~/.dput.cf has following section


[gregale-extras]
login = fanoush
fqdn = garage
method = scp
hash = md5
allow_unsigned_uploads = 0
incoming = /var/www/extras/incoming/gregale

Same thing happens with Bora. It worked fine last time I needed it 
(2009-12-01).


And BTW I canot find this in maemo wiki anywhere (due to cleanups?) It 
should be documented in http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras. Nearest relevant 
topic is http://wiki.maemo.org/Uploading_to_Extras-devel#dput


Frantisek
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: ssh uploading to gregale/bora/chinook extras broken?

2010-04-07 Thread Andrew Flegg
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:16, Frantisek Dufka duf...@seznam.cz wrote:

 I have a problem with upload binary deb to gregale/bora/chinook extras.
 Is this supposed to be working? First I noticed that server key was
 changed so I needed to remove old one from known hosts. And then
 uploading via dput still fails with permisison denied, see below

 Permission denied (publickey).
 [...] fano...@garage:/var/www/extras/incoming/gregale'

Should this now be drop.maemo.org? The change wasn't well communicated
at all, especially the impact on the legacy servers.

One of the advantages of the new servers was to fix bug #3354. If the
old server is still used for legacy builds, you might still be seeing
it:

https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3354

HTH,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
Maemo Community Council chair
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Not able to install Hildon Test Automation Framework on N900

2010-04-07 Thread Piñeiro
From: praveen koduru prawin1...@gmail.com

  Hi ,
 I tried the steps suggested in the following link.
 http://hildon-test-aut.garage.maemo.org/installation.html

This is a really old guide. The target were the Nokia 770/810, not
sure if works fine on N900.

 Steps I have tried:
 
 1. Installed all .deb packages as pointed by the above link.
 
 2. arm_for_testing on. executed the command  rebooted
 
 3. Install Dogtail from the above link
 
cd dogtail; ./setup.py install
 4.  Then tested an example application sniff, which is present in the
 dogtail.
 - sniff not working
 - It throws error
   ImportError: cannot import name checkForA11yInteractively

AFAIK, sniff have never worked.

Have you tried to use directly dogtail? Something like:

   from dogtail import tree
   tree.root.dump ()


 I enabled Accessibility through gconftool-2 --type bool --set
 /desktop/gnome/interface/accessibility true

This is the way to enable the accessibility in the desktop, and it is
more recently that the package version number used in that link.

So, in this framework, this gconf variable is not used at all, it is
just based on GTK_MODULES and other custom things.

 But still the same error.
 
 I jus tried the following
 1. python2.5
  2. import pyatspi
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
ImportError: No module named pyatspi
 I installed python-at-spi_0.6.1-1osso2_armel.deb package from the above
 link. but still it is showing no module pyatspi.

pyatspi is the last python accessibility bindings. This python-at-spi
package is about the old python bindings. Try something like:

$python2.5
 import atspi

And if it works, you could a script like this:

#!/usr/bin/env python
# Return the name of the applications currently registered

import atspi
desk = atspi.registry.getDesktop(0)
for i in xrange(desk.getChildCount()):
app = desk.getChildAtIndex(i)
print Index: %d % i
try:
print Application name: %s % app.getName()
print Application elements: %d % app.getChildCount()
except Exception: print Error getting name or childcount
print

 All I need is to install dogtail and thus Hildon Test Automation framework
 successfully and write some test scripts on N900.
 any Help will be greatly appreciated.

As I said, have you tried to use directly dogtail instead of use
Sniff?

BR

===
API (apinhe...@igalia.com)
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: ssh uploading to gregale/bora/chinook extras broken?

2010-04-07 Thread Frantisek Dufka

Andrew Flegg wrote:

Permission denied (publickey).
[...] fano...@garage:/var/www/extras/incoming/gregale'


Should this now be drop.maemo.org? The change wasn't well communicated
at all, especially the impact on the legacy servers.



Oh, thanks, I totally missed the server name change. But anyway 
drop.maemo.org works for scp login but now I am getting

scp: /var/www/extras/incoming/gregale: No such file or directory

What are corect paths for binary uploads to gregale/bora/chinook?

Frantisek

___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Not able to install Hildon Test Automation Framework on N900

2010-04-07 Thread praveen koduru
Thanks for the quick response Piñeiro.
I tried your 2 steps. Please find the results below.

Step 1:
Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt# python
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, May 23 2007, 17:32:51)
[GCC 3.4.4 (release) (CodeSourcery ARM 2005q3-2)] on linux2
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
 from dogtail import tree
Creating logfile at /tmp/dogtail/logs/log_20100407-130759_debug ...
Detecting distribution: Debian (or derived distribution)
Warning: AT-SPI's desktop is visible but it has no children. Are you running
any AT-SPI-aware applications?
 tree.root.dump ()
{root}
(I have opened contacts and then did tree.root.dump(). but stilll giving
{root} only)

Step 2:
 import atspi
works fine; I tried the script you have given. script executed but with no
prints
Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt# ./Piñeiro.py
Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt#

-Praveen

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Piñeiro apinhe...@igalia.com wrote:

 From: praveen koduru prawin1...@gmail.com

   Hi ,
  I tried the steps suggested in the following link.
  http://hildon-test-aut.garage.maemo.org/installation.html

 This is a really old guide. The target were the Nokia 770/810, not
 sure if works fine on N900.

  Steps I have tried:
 
  1. Installed all .deb packages as pointed by the above link.
 
  2. arm_for_testing on. executed the command  rebooted
 
  3. Install Dogtail from the above link
 
 cd dogtail; ./setup.py install
  4.  Then tested an example application sniff, which is present in the
  dogtail.
  - sniff not working
  - It throws error
ImportError: cannot import name
 checkForA11yInteractively

 AFAIK, sniff have never worked.

 Have you tried to use directly dogtail? Something like:

   from dogtail import tree
   tree.root.dump ()


  I enabled Accessibility through gconftool-2 --type bool --set
  /desktop/gnome/interface/accessibility true

 This is the way to enable the accessibility in the desktop, and it is
 more recently that the package version number used in that link.

 So, in this framework, this gconf variable is not used at all, it is
 just based on GTK_MODULES and other custom things.

  But still the same error.
 
  I jus tried the following
  1. python2.5
   2. import pyatspi
 Traceback (most recent call last):
 File stdin, line 1, in module
 ImportError: No module named pyatspi
  I installed python-at-spi_0.6.1-1osso2_armel.deb package from the above
  link. but still it is showing no module pyatspi.

 pyatspi is the last python accessibility bindings. This python-at-spi
 package is about the old python bindings. Try something like:

 $python2.5
  import atspi

 And if it works, you could a script like this:

 #!/usr/bin/env python
 # Return the name of the applications currently registered

 import atspi
 desk = atspi.registry.getDesktop(0)
 for i in xrange(desk.getChildCount()):
app = desk.getChildAtIndex(i)
print Index: %d % i
try:
print Application name: %s % app.getName()
print Application elements: %d % app.getChildCount()
except Exception: print Error getting name or childcount
print

  All I need is to install dogtail and thus Hildon Test Automation
 framework
  successfully and write some test scripts on N900.
  any Help will be greatly appreciated.

 As I said, have you tried to use directly dogtail instead of use
 Sniff?

 BR

 ===
 API (apinhe...@igalia.com)

___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Not able to install Hildon Test Automation Framework on N900

2010-04-07 Thread Piñeiro
From: praveen koduru prawin1...@gmail.com

 Thanks for the quick response Piñeiro.
 I tried your 2 steps. Please find the results below.
 
 Step 1:
 Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt# python
 Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, May 23 2007, 17:32:51)
 [GCC 3.4.4 (release) (CodeSourcery ARM 2005q3-2)] on linux2
 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
 from dogtail import tree
 Creating logfile at /tmp/dogtail/logs/log_20100407-130759_debug ...
 Detecting distribution: Debian (or derived distribution)
 Warning: AT-SPI's desktop is visible but it has no children. Are you running
 any AT-SPI-aware applications?

Anyway, please check if at-spi is running.

 tree.root.dump ()
 {root}
 (I have opened contacts and then did tree.root.dump(). but stilll giving
 {root} only)

As far as I remember arm-for testing just enable the accessibility
support for the applications included in the testing framework.

What it does is replace the launcher file application, in order to
launch the applications supported with GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge.

Remember that in maemo there are a maemo-launcher/invoker
application. Applications are loaded using this application.

I bet that contacts was not included in this framework, as it is a
really recent application.

You could try to modify by hand the contacts launch file, replacing
/usr/bin/osso-addresbook to something like this:

#!/bin/sh
unset AF_DEFINES_SOURCED
source /etc/osso-af-init/af-defines.sh
export GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge
exec maemo-summoner /usr/bin/osso-addressbook.launch

That is what arm-for-testing does (more or less, AFAIK) for the
supported applications.

Note: probably you should require to reboot the device after that.


 Step 2:
 import atspi
 works fine; I tried the script you have given. script executed but with no
 prints
 Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt# ./Piñeiro.py
 Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt#

It doesn't print anything as no application is registered on at-spi.

BR

===
API (apinhe...@igalia.com)
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Not able to install Hildon Test Automation Framework on N900

2010-04-07 Thread praveen koduru
I have checked atspi is running or not like this
 import atspi

(no errors). Is this the way to check whether it is running or not??

I am trying to get the object of Calculator app on N900. I really dont
know how to do that. where as on desktop I did like this for opening an
Totem application.
totem = tree.root.application('totem')
MovieMenu=totem.menu('Movie').click()
This justed worked on Desktop. Whereas to get the object of Calculator 
App on Maemo. I did this
Calc=tree.root.application('/usr/bin/osso_calculator')
searching for child of {root}: /usr/bin/osso_calculator application
(attempt 3)
searching for child of {root}: /usr/bin/osso_calculator application
(attempt 4)
... and the trying went on.

So could you please suggest me how to get the object of Calculator and
click one button with that.

Thanks a lot for your help.
-Praveen
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Piñeiro apinhe...@igalia.com wrote:

 From: praveen koduru prawin1...@gmail.com

  Thanks for the quick response Piñeiro.
  I tried your 2 steps. Please find the results below.
 
  Step 1:
  Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt# python
  Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, May 23 2007, 17:32:51)
  [GCC 3.4.4 (release) (CodeSourcery ARM 2005q3-2)] on linux2
  Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
  from dogtail import tree
  Creating logfile at /tmp/dogtail/logs/log_20100407-130759_debug ...
  Detecting distribution: Debian (or derived distribution)
  Warning: AT-SPI's desktop is visible but it has no children. Are you
 running
  any AT-SPI-aware applications?

 Anyway, please check if at-spi is running.

  tree.root.dump ()
  {root}
  (I have opened contacts and then did tree.root.dump(). but stilll
 giving
  {root} only)

 As far as I remember arm-for testing just enable the accessibility
 support for the applications included in the testing framework.

 What it does is replace the launcher file application, in order to
 launch the applications supported with GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge.

 Remember that in maemo there are a maemo-launcher/invoker
 application. Applications are loaded using this application.

 I bet that contacts was not included in this framework, as it is a
 really recent application.

 You could try to modify by hand the contacts launch file, replacing
 /usr/bin/osso-addresbook to something like this:

 #!/bin/sh
 unset AF_DEFINES_SOURCED
 source /etc/osso-af-init/af-defines.sh
 export GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge
 exec maemo-summoner /usr/bin/osso-addressbook.launch

 That is what arm-for-testing does (more or less, AFAIK) for the
 supported applications.

 Note: probably you should require to reboot the device after that.

 
  Step 2:
  import atspi
  works fine; I tried the script you have given. script executed but with
 no
  prints
  Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt# ./Piñeiro.py
  Nokia-N900-42-11:/home/opt#

 It doesn't print anything as no application is registered on at-spi.

 BR

 ===
 API (apinhe...@igalia.com)

___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: proper icon path

2010-04-07 Thread David King

On 2010-04-06 15:35, Stefanos Harhalakis v...@v13.gr wrote:

On Tuesday 06 of April 2010, daniel wilms wrote:

ext Stefanos Harhalakis wrote:
 I'm currently using /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps/, but I see other
 applications using /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64/hildon, or even
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps and
 /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/hildon.

 Is there a proper location or is everything acceptable?

The proper location for the icons is in:

/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/hildon/


Thank you for clarifying that.

Is there a reason why scalable was chosen? AFAIK for desktop systems this is
supposed to hold scalable graphics like SVGs while bitmaps icons are
supposed to go under /usr/share/icons/hicolor/AxB/ (AxB being the dimension)
(or perhaps I know wrong).


I would also like to know this, as I was going to edit a few wiki pages 
that mention install locations for icons. However, all the locations 
above seem to work just fine (I tested with a few applications), and the 
freedesktop.org icon naming specification suggests that ‘apps’ is the 
correct subdirectory to use:


http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-naming-spec/icon-naming-spec-latest.html#context

Daniel, is /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/hildon/ the canonical 
location for all application icons on Fremantle, and if so, where is 
this documented?


--
David King | http://amigadave.com/ | dav...@openismus.com
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Promotion

2010-04-07 Thread Niels Breet
On Wed, April 7, 2010 10:06, Martin Grimme wrote:
 Hi,
Hi,

 same here, so it might be a general problem with the Diablo promoter.
 Besides taking 9 days for the package interface to recognize that a
 package has been updated, and then complaining that the package didn't have
 a proper description (which it certainly has). The package icon is not
 imported, either. Please somebody look at the Diablo package interface to
 see what's going wrong. For information, my stuck Diablo package is
 'fmradio-player 2010.03.20-2'.

You use long lines in your control file where 80 chars is recommended. The
importer didn't like that so it left the entries empty.

I've now changed the importer to import long lines too.



 Regards,
 Martin


--
Niels Breet
maemo.org webmaster


___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Promotion

2010-04-07 Thread Niels Breet
On Sun, April 4, 2010 20:42, George Kibardin wrote:
 Hi everybody,


 It seems that I missed something. Suddenly I cannot promote the latest
 version of my app from diablo extras-devel to diablo extras. I've read
 this http://wiki.maemo.org/Uploading_to_Extras, tried this
 https://garage.maemo.org/promoter/diablo and still no luck. I see my app
 in extras-devel, but there is nothing like promote button.


The promote link is found on the armel version page of your application:
http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/diablo_extras-devel_free_armel/feedcircuit/0.7.6-2/

The link doesn't show because you are not using one of the sections listed
in http://wiki.maemo.org/Package_Categories

 P.S. I see that for Fremantle promotion process is more complex, but I
 still cannot get the idea - what to do to initiate promotion process?

Same thing. Go to the armel version of the package in fremantle
extras-devel and click on promote.


 Best,
 George

--
Niels Breet
maemo.org webmaster


___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: ssh uploading to gregale/bora/chinook extras broken?

2010-04-07 Thread Niels Breet
On Wed, April 7, 2010 12:16, Frantisek Dufka wrote:
 Andrew Flegg wrote:

 Permission denied (publickey).
 [...] fano...@garage:/var/www/extras/incoming/gregale'


 Should this now be drop.maemo.org? The change wasn't well communicated
 at all, especially the impact on the legacy servers.


 Oh, thanks, I totally missed the server name change. But anyway
 drop.maemo.org works for scp login but now I am getting scp:
 /var/www/extras/incoming/gregale: No such file or directory

Seems I missed a link there. Does it work for you now?


 What are corect paths for binary uploads to gregale/bora/chinook?

I've added gregale to the wiki here:

https://wiki.maemo.org/Uploading_to_Extras-devel#dput

Bora has been dead for a while now, chinook is also EOL.


 Frantisek

--
Niels Breet
maemo.org webmaster


___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Andrew Flegg
Hi,

The number of issues being caused by the deployment of PR1.2 SDK to
the fremantle autobuilder is becoming critical. It doesn't even matter
when PR1.2 is released, as we should have a way of dealing with this
in-place for the next upgrade.


BACKGROUND
~~
After the PR1.2 SDK was released, Niels deployed it to the
autobuilder; enacting a plan which was discussed on this list. This
has caused problems with libhildon dependencies, but the problems
aren't just limited to that library:

http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/2010-March/025668.html

Both Niels and the Council believe we should do something to assist.


WHAT WE SHOULD DO
~
We *need* to do something, both to improve the situation in -devel and
-testing today, and test an approach for the next upgrade.

The main requirements here are, I think:

 * It's not an excessive amount of work
 * It's a viable long term strategy
 * The QA process doesn't get broken

Thoughts and comments from developers, or anyone else with a idea,
will be much appreciated.


OPTIONS
~~~
1) Deploy SDKs as they are released; treat -devel and -testing as trunk.

This is what we have now, I think we can say it doesn't work if
there's going to be more than a few days between SDK release and
device upgrade. Since Nokia doesn't pre-announce release dates, and
last minute bugs could cause problems; I think we can rule this one
out.

2) Revert the builder.

This is basically a step backwards. Changing the builder config is
easy. Cleaning up -devel and rebuilding the affected packages is quite
some work as we don't have any scripts for that made yet.

3) Hack the SDK, create some kind of hybrid.

This'd be bad enough if limited to just libhildon, but isn't viable
and WILL cause unforeseen problems. Veto :-)

4) Create separate repos, build queues for pre- and post-1.2.

Similar to what's been done for Extras proper. Creating the repos
will be about a day work, but the part that sits on top of that
(management scripts, Packages interface, QA queue) will probably take
a week of work.

There are hard issues around QA here.

5) Try building in each SDK in turn.

My suggestion; when someone uploads to fremantle auto-builder it
attempts to build the package against the PR1.1 SDK. If it succeeds,
it goes into Extras-devel. If it fails to build, it gets built with
the PR1.2 SDK, and so on.

For an app with compile time symbol resolution (e.g. C/C++), this'd
handle both cases quite nicely. Python apps would have to depend on
the specific versions of bindings which gave them the features they
wanted - again, not too much of a problem.

At extras(-stable) promotion time you could even decide, based on
actual binary package dependencies, whether to put in fremantle-1.2 or
both fremantle-1.2  fremantle extras repos. This would fix another
common complain, what if I don't upgrade for a few weeks.

Larger packages could be prevent from being tried to built twice by
stating a forced build dependency on a PR1.2 version of any system
package.

Some software won't install from -devel and -testing as it does now,
but that will be reduced to the set of software which is actually
using features that are unavailable. A HAM patch could grey out
applications which were uninstallable, or show some other indication.

This is, effectively, reinventing the more intelligent dpkg-shlibdeps:

  http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps

However, it deals with the following three circumstances:

 1) Application uses API which has changed in later SDK. This
will be built with PR1.1 SDK, succeeds and goes into
Extras-devel. Can be promoted to Extras-testing but
there's no clear way for a tester to know it won't work
if their device is running the latest OS.

 2) Application uses API which is unchanged in later SDK.
This will be built with PR1.1 SDK, succeeds and goes into
Extras-devel. Can be promoted to Extras-testing and
tested on any device with PR1.1 or PR1.2. Once promoted
it COULD go into fremantle and fremantle-1.2.

 3) Application uses API which is introduced in later SDK.
This will be built with PR1.1 SDK and fail. It will
be rebuilt with PR1.2 SDK, succeed and go into
Extras-devel. Can be promoted to Extras-testing and
tested by testers using the most recent release.
Once promoted it will go into fremantle-1.2.

6) Case-by-case basis.

Developer complains: add a temporary exception to autobuilder to build
$APPNAME with PR1.0/1.1 SDK, but goes into the shared extras-devel as
now.

Thanks in advance,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
Maemo Community Council chair
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Not able to install Hildon Test Automation Framework on N900

2010-04-07 Thread Piñeiro
From: praveen koduru prawin1...@gmail.com

 I have checked atspi is running or not like this
 import atspi

 (no errors). Is this the way to check whether it is running or not??

No, I mean something more simple:

ps aux | grep at-spi

 I am trying to get the object of Calculator app on N900. I really dont
 know how to do that. where as on desktop I did like this for opening an
 Totem application.
 totem = tree.root.application('totem')
 MovieMenu=totem.menu('Movie').click()
 This justed worked on Desktop. Whereas to get the object of Calculator 
 App on Maemo. I did this
 Calc=tree.root.application('/usr/bin/osso_calculator')
 searching for child of {root}: /usr/bin/osso_calculator application
 (attempt 3)
 searching for child of {root}: /usr/bin/osso_calculator application
 (attempt 4)
 ... and the trying went on.

As I told you before, arm-for-testing on doesn't enable a11y for all
applications. Take into account that this link is for a automatic
testing framework, so it only include some applications.

In order to load the a11y modules, GTK_MODULES need to be set to
GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge.

arm-for-testing on change the launcher of the supported applications
in order to be sure that GTK_MODULES has the correct values.

 So could you please suggest me how to get the object of Calculator and
 click one button with that.

You could try the same suggestion I made in the previous mail related
with the contacts application. Try to change the calculator launcher,
in order to use the summoner and have the envvar with the correct
value:

 #!/bin/sh
 unset AF_DEFINES_SOURCED
 source /etc/osso-af-init/af-defines.sh
 export GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge
 exec maemo-summoner /usr/bin/osso-addressbook.launch

In the same way, you could create a simple gtk application, without
maemo-launcher, and then try to execute it by hand in this way:

$GTK_MODULES=gail:hail:atk-bridge ./my-gtk-application

 Thanks a lot for your help.

You are welcome, sorry for not be enough clear in my explanations, and
thanks to test it. I have Try if all a11y pieces works on n900 in my
TODO list for a long time.

 -Praveen

BR

===
API (apinhe...@igalia.com)
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Bryan Jacobs
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 14:55:51 +0100
Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:

 Hi,
 
 The number of issues being caused by the deployment of PR1.2 SDK to
 the fremantle autobuilder is becoming critical. It doesn't even matter
 when PR1.2 is released, as we should have a way of dealing with this
 in-place for the next upgrade.
 
 
 BACKGROUND
 ~~
 After the PR1.2 SDK was released, Niels deployed it to the
 autobuilder; enacting a plan which was discussed on this list. This
 has caused problems with libhildon dependencies, but the problems
 aren't just limited to that library:
 
 http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/2010-March/025668.html
 
 Both Niels and the Council believe we should do something to assist.
 
 
 WHAT WE SHOULD DO
 ~
 We *need* to do something, both to improve the situation in -devel and
 -testing today, and test an approach for the next upgrade.
 
 The main requirements here are, I think:
 
  * It's not an excessive amount of work
  * It's a viable long term strategy
  * The QA process doesn't get broken
 
 Thoughts and comments from developers, or anyone else with a idea,
 will be much appreciated.
 
 
 OPTIONS
 ~~~
 1) Deploy SDKs as they are released; treat -devel and -testing as
 trunk.
 
 This is what we have now, I think we can say it doesn't work if
 there's going to be more than a few days between SDK release and
 device upgrade. Since Nokia doesn't pre-announce release dates, and
 last minute bugs could cause problems; I think we can rule this one
 out.
 
 2) Revert the builder.
 
 This is basically a step backwards. Changing the builder config is
 easy. Cleaning up -devel and rebuilding the affected packages is quite
 some work as we don't have any scripts for that made yet.
 
 3) Hack the SDK, create some kind of hybrid.
 
 This'd be bad enough if limited to just libhildon, but isn't viable
 and WILL cause unforeseen problems. Veto :-)
 
 4) Create separate repos, build queues for pre- and post-1.2.
 
 Similar to what's been done for Extras proper. Creating the repos
 will be about a day work, but the part that sits on top of that
 (management scripts, Packages interface, QA queue) will probably take
 a week of work.
 
 There are hard issues around QA here.
 
 5) Try building in each SDK in turn.
 
 My suggestion; when someone uploads to fremantle auto-builder it
 attempts to build the package against the PR1.1 SDK. If it succeeds,
 it goes into Extras-devel. If it fails to build, it gets built with
 the PR1.2 SDK, and so on.
 
 For an app with compile time symbol resolution (e.g. C/C++), this'd
 handle both cases quite nicely. Python apps would have to depend on
 the specific versions of bindings which gave them the features they
 wanted - again, not too much of a problem.
 
 At extras(-stable) promotion time you could even decide, based on
 actual binary package dependencies, whether to put in fremantle-1.2 or
 both fremantle-1.2  fremantle extras repos. This would fix another
 common complain, what if I don't upgrade for a few weeks.
 
 Larger packages could be prevent from being tried to built twice by
 stating a forced build dependency on a PR1.2 version of any system
 package.
 
 Some software won't install from -devel and -testing as it does now,
 but that will be reduced to the set of software which is actually
 using features that are unavailable. A HAM patch could grey out
 applications which were uninstallable, or show some other indication.
 
 This is, effectively, reinventing the more intelligent dpkg-shlibdeps:
 
   http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps
 
 However, it deals with the following three circumstances:
 
  1) Application uses API which has changed in later SDK. This
 will be built with PR1.1 SDK, succeeds and goes into
 Extras-devel. Can be promoted to Extras-testing but
 there's no clear way for a tester to know it won't work
 if their device is running the latest OS.
 
  2) Application uses API which is unchanged in later SDK.
 This will be built with PR1.1 SDK, succeeds and goes into
 Extras-devel. Can be promoted to Extras-testing and
 tested on any device with PR1.1 or PR1.2. Once promoted
 it COULD go into fremantle and fremantle-1.2.
 
  3) Application uses API which is introduced in later SDK.
 This will be built with PR1.1 SDK and fail. It will
 be rebuilt with PR1.2 SDK, succeed and go into
 Extras-devel. Can be promoted to Extras-testing and
 tested by testers using the most recent release.
 Once promoted it will go into fremantle-1.2.
 
 6) Case-by-case basis.
 
 Developer complains: add a temporary exception to autobuilder to build
 $APPNAME with PR1.0/1.1 SDK, but goes into the shared extras-devel as
 now.
 
 Thanks in advance,
 
 Andrew
 

Hello all,

Pardon the intrusion from somebody who doesn't usually post on this
list, but I think I might have some input.

It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty in

Bora/OS2007 extras is dead? Re: ssh uploading to gregale/bora/chinook extras broken?

2010-04-07 Thread Frantisek Dufka

Niels Breet wrote:

Seems I missed a link there. Does it work for you now?



Yes. Thanks.


Bora has been dead for a while now, chinook is also EOL.


Bora is dead? Oh really? So why there is 
http://maemo.org/downloads/OS2007/ with old version I cannot update? 
When and why was this discussed/decided?


I am using OS2007 on my N800 and I like it (Opera, no huge menus, better 
UI speed overall). I want to support people who do want to keep OS2007 
on their N800. And Bora is also alive as a hacker edition for 770.


As for Chinook, well, Diablo broke some stuff in browser so it may be a 
good choice too but killing it is understandable. But why OS2007? Should 
we kill 770/OS2006 too?


Frantisek
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Andrew Flegg
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:13, Bryan Jacobs n...@landwarsin.asia wrote:

 It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty in
 implementing #4 above.  If there were magically separate infrastructure
 for each incompatible release, there would be no issue - a developer
 uploads their package to each repository for which it builds
 (preferably through a list of checkboxes in the web interface), and
 a user selects one or more package sources that match the preinstalled
 software on their device.  No problems, mate.

True; however what about the QA process? The UI at
http://maemo.org/packages/ is getting better, but it's also getting
more familiar. How do we:

  a) not confuse ad-hoc testers
  b) ensure that versions in all repos get tested?

One suggestion would be to promote all versions simultaneously, but
there are obvious drawbacks with that!

 So the real issue is that creating a new branch requires a nontrivial
 amount of work.  This is a computerized system; computers excel at
 automation.  Why not spend the one-off time to allow for near-instant
 creation of a new branch?  Once that's done, future releases will just
 consist of oh, I should create a new repository for this release.  Let
 me run that script again with a new name and then upload the new SDK
 release to it.

Indeed.

 Have I missed some important consideration?

I think the issues aren't technical (although streamlining the repo
creation is obviously part of it), but more procedural. I could be
wrong. I wonder what the testing squad think (I'll poke VDVsx).

Cheers,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
Maemo Community Council chair
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Bryan Jacobs
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 15:41:48 +0100
Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:

 On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:13, Bryan Jacobs n...@landwarsin.asia wrote:
 
  It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty in
  implementing #4 above.  If there were magically separate
  infrastructure for each incompatible release, there would be no
  issue - a developer uploads their package to each repository for
  which it builds (preferably through a list of checkboxes in the web
  interface), and a user selects one or more package sources that
  match the preinstalled software on their device.  No problems, mate.
 
 True; however what about the QA process? The UI at
 http://maemo.org/packages/ is getting better, but it's also getting
 more familiar. How do we:
 
   a) not confuse ad-hoc testers
   b) ensure that versions in all repos get tested?


Each QA tester (probably) only uses one device for testing.  If this is
true, this means that applications get tested on the platform the QA
testers are on.  This doesn't guarantee coverage for any particular
application/SDK combination, but it does mean that things that are
important to (the QA) users will get more throughly used.  I'm not
convinced that's a bad thing.

As long as the QA users make both positive and negative bug reports, I
think this will probably work out while not totally satisfying (b)
above. (a) is OK because each QA tester just uses the repos matching
their device, and upgrades whenever the next level meets their own
personal comfort level with the bleeding-edge-to-stability spectrum.
 
 One suggestion would be to promote all versions simultaneously, but
 there are obvious drawbacks with that!

I wouldn't do that.  I'd promote things when you have enough negative
bug reports about the particular version.  Some things will never get
promoted if nobody loves them.  Tough cookies - if nobody cares enough
to test the package as it is, does it really need promotion?

  So the real issue is that creating a new branch requires a
  nontrivial amount of work.  This is a computerized system;
  computers excel at automation.  Why not spend the one-off time to
  allow for near-instant creation of a new branch?  Once that's done,
  future releases will just consist of oh, I should create a new
  repository for this release.  Let me run that script again with a
  new name and then upload the new SDK release to it.
 
 Indeed.
 
  Have I missed some important consideration?
 
 I think the issues aren't technical (although streamlining the repo
 creation is obviously part of it), but more procedural. I could be
 wrong. I wonder what the testing squad think (I'll poke VDVsx).

I can't really say anything about whatever internal rules would
restrict this from working.  I obviously have an interest in the
process working better than it has, so I felt like commenting.  It
would be a shame if it were more than a technical problem.  It's easier
to argue for longer about qualitative things.

 Cheers,
 
 Andrew
 

Bryan Jacobs


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


GSoC project discussion - MeeGo cloud storage support

2010-04-07 Thread Felix Kerekes
Hi,

First of all, I'm sorry I'm posting this so close to the deadline, I know
how important it is to discuss any idea with developers and possible mentors
beforehand. I'm interested in working on the cloud storage support project
for the Maemo and MeeGo community. Before boring you with details about
myself, I'd like to present you my ideas and hopefully get some feedback
that will help me improve my final application.

My proposed solution involves developing several separate applications that
will communicate over DBus.

The main application (which I will call cloud-storage for now) will be
responsible for detecting which cloud storage services are available and
will handle general configuration (like what folders to share, which
services to use for each folder etc.). It will export a DBus object probably
called com.meego.CloudStorage. It will watch for changes in files and
folders and automatically notify the corresponding service implementations.
A different application will provide an UI for configuring the service,
implemented using Qt.

Every cloud storage service will be implemented as a different process which
will export a DBus object (something like
com.meego.CloudStorage.Service.ServiceName). The object will include
methods for uploading files and folders and signals for mirroring changes on
the remote side. Each service will need to be configured separately by
providing username, password and other necessary information. Services that
I find interesting to implement first include Ubuntu One, Dropbox and Google
Docs (Google now allows storing any file online, not only documents), with
others following.

The reasoning behind using DBus is that it allows great flexibility in many
ways including programming language, perhaps also different implementations
for the same service. It also allows other applications to interact or
monitor the syncing process. Adding or removing services will be just as
easy as installing some package. DBus being the only major dependency (apart
from any libraries which cloud storage service implementation might use),
the framework should have no problem running on both Maemo and MeeGo, or
even on desktop environments.

So, I'm eager to know what you think about the feasibility of this idea. I
have intentionally omitted details about the implementation or
specification, those will be included in my application. Right now, I want
to know if implementing this over DBus seems like a good idea. An initial
draft of my application supportiof my application supporting this idea will
follow very soon.

Thanks,
Felix Kerekes (sttwister)
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Javier S. Pedro
Andrew Flegg wrote:

 Hi,
 
 The number of issues being caused by the deployment of PR1.2 SDK to the
 fremantle autobuilder is becoming critical. It doesn't even matter when
 PR1.2 is released, as we should have a way of dealing with this in-place
 for the next upgrade.

I've copied the contents of your message to the wiki:
http://wiki.maemo.org/Task:PR1.2_autobuilder

I have also added some stuff about dpkg-shlibdeps that we have been discussing
on IRC a few minutes ago. 

Feel free to add any extra options or cons of existing ones.

-- 
Javier

___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Niels Breet
On Wed, April 7, 2010 16:41, Andrew Flegg wrote:
 On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:13, Bryan Jacobs n...@landwarsin.asia wrote:


 It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty in
 implementing #4 above.  If there were magically separate infrastructure
 for each incompatible release, there would be no issue - a developer
 uploads their package to each repository for which it builds (preferably
 through a list of checkboxes in the web interface), and a user selects
 one or more package sources that match the preinstalled software on
 their device.  No problems, mate.

 True; however what about the QA process? The UI at
 http://maemo.org/packages/ is getting better, but it's also getting
 more familiar. How do we:

 a) not confuse ad-hoc testers b) ensure that versions in all repos get
 tested?


This is a non-trivial issue. Testing against all repos is not going to
work, imagine what happens when we have PR1.2+1 etc.

 One suggestion would be to promote all versions simultaneously, but
 there are obvious drawbacks with that!

That would make the most recent repo the best supported and tested repo.
Older repos might or might not work. But then again, that is what -devel
is now too.

 So the real issue is that creating a new branch requires a nontrivial
 amount of work.  This is a computerized system; computers excel at
 automation.  Why not spend the one-off time to allow for near-instant
 creation of a new branch?  Once that's done, future releases will just
 consist of oh, I should create a new repository for this release.  Let
  me run that script again with a new name and then upload the new SDK
 release to it.

 Indeed.


 Have I missed some important consideration?


 I think the issues aren't technical (although streamlining the repo
 creation is obviously part of it), but more procedural. I could be wrong.

There is also the technical issue that after SSU you would need to change
your catalog settings in your device manually for -devel and -testing.

Getting that changed in AM is probably not going to happen.


 Cheers,


 Andrew


 --
 Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
 Maemo Community Council chair

--
Niels Breet
maemo.org webmaster


___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Bora/OS2007 extras is dead? Re: ssh uploading to gregale/bora/chinook extras broken?

2010-04-07 Thread Graham Cobb
On Wednesday 07 April 2010 15:39:29 Frantisek Dufka wrote:
 Niels Breet wrote:
  Bora has been dead for a while now, chinook is also EOL.

 Bora is dead? Oh really? So why there is
 http://maemo.org/downloads/OS2007/ with old version I cannot update?
 When and why was this discussed/decided?

It wasn't, as far as I know.  Killing chinook was, and I agree that it is 
probably the right thing to do.  But gregale, bora and diablo are important.

Graham
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: GSoC project discussion - MeeGo cloud storage support

2010-04-07 Thread Felix Kerekes
An initial version of my application can be found here:
http://socghop.appspot.com/gsoc/student_proposal/show/google/gsoc2010/sttwister/t127066037516

Cheers,
Felix Kerekes (sttwister)
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Ram Kurvakat
I would like to throw in my 2 pence as well for what its worth.

The idea is to give a choice to the developer to choose which SDK the 
autobuilder needs to use and to which repo the app needs to go to.
Providing an option in the debian control file to build against the user 
specified SDK since the developer knows what SDK he/she uses.

e.g:
Xsbc-sdk : PR1.2

Also, we can maintain n and n-1 version of the repository at any time to limit 
the number of maemo OS trunks.

does it look feasible ?


 - Original Message -
 From: Andrew Flegg
 Sent: 04/07/10 03:41 PM
 To: Bryan Jacobs
 Subject: Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?
 
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:13, Bryan Jacobs n...@landwarsin.asia wrote:

 It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty in
 implementing #4 above. If there were magically separate infrastructure
 for each incompatible release, there would be no issue - a developer
 uploads their package to each repository for which it builds
 (preferably through a list of checkboxes in the web interface), and
 a user selects one or more package sources that match the preinstalled
 software on their device. No problems, mate.

True; however what about the QA process? The UI at
http://maemo.org/packages/ is getting better, but it's also getting
more familiar. How do we:

 a) not confuse ad-hoc testers
 b) ensure that versions in all repos get tested?

One suggestion would be to promote all versions simultaneously, but
there are obvious drawbacks with that!

 So the real issue is that creating a new branch requires a nontrivial
 amount of work. This is a computerized system; computers excel at
 automation. Why not spend the one-off time to allow for near-instant
 creation of a new branch? Once that's done, future releases will just
 consist of oh, I should create a new repository for this release. Let
 me run that script again with a new name and then upload the new SDK
 release to it.

Indeed.

 Have I missed some important consideration?

I think the issues aren't technical (although streamlining the repo
creation is obviously part of it), but more procedural. I could be
wrong. I wonder what the testing squad think (I'll poke VDVsx).

Cheers,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/
Maemo Community Council chair
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Thomas Perl
2010/4/7 Ram Kurvakat rkma...@gmx.com:
 The idea is to give a choice to the developer to choose which SDK the 
 autobuilder needs to use and to which repo the app needs to go to.
 Providing an option in the debian control file to build against the user 
 specified SDK since the developer knows what SDK he/she uses.

 e.g:
 Xsbc-sdk : PR1.2

Another Maemo-specific control field? No thanks :) Just create two repositories.

It worked fine for Chinook and Diablo, and developers uploaded the same source
package to Chinook and Diablo without problems until the Chinook autobuilder
was closed down.

The situation with pre-PR1.2 and PR1.2 is similar to Chinook and Diablo. We can
think of PR1.2 as Maemo 5.1 the same way Diablo has been Maemo 4.1.

As for testing/QA: Testers will simply use the repository for which
they have got
firmware on their devices. Which is why I support the idea of community firmware
testing (which would allow both testers and developers to test apps on the real
devices with the real firmware). Do you really want people to test apps in the
SDK and pretend that they will work the same way on a real device?

Thomas
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: Re: Promotion

2010-04-07 Thread George Kibardin

It works now! Thank you!

07.04.10, 15:07, Niels Breet ni...@maemo.org:

 On Sun, April 4, 2010 20:42, George Kibardin wrote:
   Hi everybody,
  
  
   It seems that I missed something. Suddenly I cannot promote the latest
   version of my app from diablo extras-devel to diablo extras. I've read
   this http://wiki.maemo.org/Uploading_to_Extras, tried this
   https://garage.maemo.org/promoter/diablo and still no luck. I see my app
   in extras-devel, but there is nothing like promote button.
  
  
  The promote link is found on the armel version page of your application:
  
 http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/diablo_extras-devel_free_armel/feedcircuit/0.7.6-2/
  
  The link doesn't show because you are not using one of the sections listed
  in http://wiki.maemo.org/Package_Categories
  
   P.S. I see that for Fremantle promotion process is more complex, but I
   still cannot get the idea - what to do to initiate promotion process?
  
  Same thing. Go to the armel version of the package in fremantle
  extras-devel and click on promote.
  
  
   Best,
   George
  
  --
  Niels Breet
  maemo.org webmaster
  
  
  
  
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Graham Cobb
On Wednesday 07 April 2010 16:54:28 Niels Breet wrote:
 On Wed, April 7, 2010 16:41, Andrew Flegg wrote:
  On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:13, Bryan Jacobs n...@landwarsin.asia wrote:
  It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty in
  implementing #4 above.  If there were magically separate infrastructure
  for each incompatible release, there would be no issue - a developer
  uploads their package to each repository for which it builds (preferably
  through a list of checkboxes in the web interface), and a user selects
  one or more package sources that match the preinstalled software on
  their device.  No problems, mate.
 
  True; however what about the QA process? The UI at
  http://maemo.org/packages/ is getting better, but it's also getting
  more familiar. How do we:
 
  a) not confuse ad-hoc testers b) ensure that versions in all repos get
  tested?

 This is a non-trivial issue. Testing against all repos is not going to
 work, imagine what happens when we have PR1.2+1 etc.

I agree.  There is little point in having repositories for old versions if 
nothing can ever get promoted into them because there are very few testers 
left.   Unless they are really intended just to be archives: they work while 
the new version is being introduced (like where we are at at the moment with 
PR1.2) but once the new version has been out a few weeks, they just drop into 
archive mode with no promotions, just an archive of software for the old 
version.

  One suggestion would be to promote all versions simultaneously, but
  there are obvious drawbacks with that!

 That would make the most recent repo the best supported and tested repo.
 Older repos might or might not work. But then again, that is what -devel
 is now too.

Actually I would make the process make all versions eligible for promotion 
simultaneously -- once the latest version is tested the developer can 
promote the other versions without QA when they wish but they can choose to 
do some more testing themselves if they wish.

In an earlier discussion I had proposed another alternative: have a single 
repository but multiple autobuilders feeding it.  I could submit to either 
the PR1.1 or PR1.2 autobuilder but the output would go into a single place.  
This seems more efficient than the build with PR1.1 and if that fails try 
PR1.2 option but otherwise quite similar.

The only problem I have noticed so far with that would come when you 
introduced a new version which made use of some PR1.2 feature, and hence was 
built with PR1.2.  At that time, the PR1.1 version would no longer be 
installable (as it has a lower version number and is in the same repository).  
But for cases like this, where PR1.2 is expected to be fairly quickly adopted 
once it is eventually released, this would probably work well enough.

Graham
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


Re: PR1.2 SDK for Extras-devel: how to solve?

2010-04-07 Thread Bryan Jacobs
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 21:27:30 +0100
Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net wrote:

 On Wednesday 07 April 2010 16:54:28 Niels Breet wrote:
  On Wed, April 7, 2010 16:41, Andrew Flegg wrote:
   On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:13, Bryan Jacobs n...@landwarsin.asia
   wrote:
   It seems to me that the real problem is actually the difficulty
   in implementing #4 above.  If there were magically separate
   infrastructure for each incompatible release, there would be no
   issue - a developer uploads their package to each repository for
   which it builds (preferably through a list of checkboxes in the
   web interface), and a user selects one or more package sources
   that match the preinstalled software on their device.  No
   problems, mate.
  
   True; however what about the QA process? The UI at
   http://maemo.org/packages/ is getting better, but it's also
   getting more familiar. How do we:
  
   a) not confuse ad-hoc testers b) ensure that versions in all
   repos get tested?
 
  This is a non-trivial issue. Testing against all repos is not going
  to work, imagine what happens when we have PR1.2+1 etc.
 
 I agree.  There is little point in having repositories for old
 versions if nothing can ever get promoted into them because there are
 very few testers left.   Unless they are really intended just to be
 archives: they work while the new version is being introduced (like
 where we are at at the moment with PR1.2) but once the new version
 has been out a few weeks, they just drop into archive mode with no
 promotions, just an archive of software for the old version.

You want to keep the repositories for exactly that reason.  People can
keep using their devices with no disruption of service.  I, at least,
feel that having the latest version of an application is secondary to
avoiding a backwards leap in functionality.

   One suggestion would be to promote all versions simultaneously,
   but there are obvious drawbacks with that!
 
  That would make the most recent repo the best supported and tested
  repo. Older repos might or might not work. But then again, that is
  what -devel is now too.
 
 Actually I would make the process make all versions eligible for
 promotion simultaneously -- once the latest version is tested the
 developer can promote the other versions without QA when they wish
 but they can choose to do some more testing themselves if they wish.

That sounds decent to me.  And it would help keep old/extras as
up-to-date as new/extras.

 In an earlier discussion I had proposed another alternative: have a
 single repository but multiple autobuilders feeding it.  I could
 submit to either the PR1.1 or PR1.2 autobuilder but the output would
 go into a single place. This seems more efficient than the build
 with PR1.1 and if that fails try PR1.2 option but otherwise quite
 similar.
 
 The only problem I have noticed so far with that would come when you 
 introduced a new version which made use of some PR1.2 feature, and
 hence was built with PR1.2.  At that time, the PR1.1 version would no
 longer be installable (as it has a lower version number and is in the
 same repository). But for cases like this, where PR1.2 is expected to
 be fairly quickly adopted once it is eventually released, this would
 probably work well enough.
 

This is the only solution proposed so far which I would reject out of
hand.  It's what we've got right now, more or less.  As a developer,
this is fine - I can use PR1.2 packages.  As a user, this is a
nightmare.  My applications disappear forever for reasons that are
unclear to me.  When I contact a developer, they say wait for the
PR1.2 release to come out.  When I ask Nokia, they say We do not
discuss release dates for future firmware updates.

It's better than the current situation in that packages not using 1.2
functionality aren't broken, but it's still not optimal and I feel it
should be avoided at all costs.  Remember, you also break packages
DEPENDING on the ones using 1.2 functionality.  The disruption could be
very large if, say, Nokia were to update glibc.

 Graham
 ___
 maemo-developers mailing list
 maemo-developers@maemo.org
 https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers