On 4 September 2010 03:24, Mikus Grinbergs <mi...@bga.com> wrote: >> For now, please don't file bugs unless you include patches. > > I can understand not wanting bug reports against items which OLPC/Sugar > are still in the process of changing. But why defer reporting problems > which might not be addressed unless there was a report ?
Because nobody other than me is fixing the problems right now, and the bugs will go stale. And if someone is available to fix bugs, you only have to spend 5 minutes working with the image to encounter several of them. A bug tracker is needless overhead for such early and "loose" development. This of course will change with time, if the project continues to progress. > For instance, Read-87 fails to launch on XO-1 os1 (F14) when it tries to > 'import evince'. Though the necessary gnome-python2-evince package was > not included in the os1 build, when I manually install that package from > the yum Fedora-14 repositories, the import statement still fails -- > apparently because the evince.so module provided by the current > Fedora-14 package has internal inconsistencies. I myself do not have a > Python test case which does 'import evince' - nor do I have a patch - > but perhaps the maintainers of the Read Activity might want to discuss > this situation with the maintainers of Python on Fedora 14. As this is a topic purely related to Sugar you are welcome to file a bug on the SL bug tracker, or start a discussion on the sugar mailing list. I should also clarify that if you have an easy solution for a bug (such as: add package XYZ) you are welcome to file a bug - by "only file bugs with patches" I guess I meant "only file bugs with patches or simple solutions" I'm just trying to focus and organize the OS-level work, and to avoid wasting time on bug tracking in this early stage. Thanks for working with me on this... Daniel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel