Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
I made some change to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit/sck/Advanced_Topics#Sweets_Distribution This section is linked from the Ubuntu page. I think it is slightly more clear now. I do not why the section title was used for the maybe most important link. This confused me at least. The raw repository link (rather than apt line) was not so friendly. So I replaced it with the Sweets_Distribution wiki page. People can find real instructions here, at least. Also, because instructions for synaptic is not available yet. I changed synaptic to more general apt. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 04:09:22PM +0800, Ma Xiaojun wrote: I made some change to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit/sck/Advanced_Topics#Sweets_Distribution This section is linked from the Ubuntu page. I think it is slightly more clear now. I do not why the section title was used for the maybe most important link. This confused me at least. I agree. I really don't like the use of the section title as a link. It goes against expectations for readers used to Wikipedia editorial policies. The raw repository link (rather than apt line) was not so friendly. So I replaced it with the Sweets_Distribution wiki page. People can find real instructions here, at least. Also, because instructions for synaptic is not available yet. I changed synaptic to more general apt. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar docs
To be honest, I cannot understand all the above discussion. However, [1] mentioned by the origin poster has images broken. I reported this issue to flossmanuals' mailing list and got confirmation. But no fix yet. Anyone can help? Currently, I would give the PDF version to new Sugar users. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
Excerpts from Edward Mokurai Cherlin's message of 2012-02-27 03:08:42 +0100: [pulling in debian-olpc-devel where the Debian efforts to package Sugar are coordinated] The big picture answer, apart from instructions for non-standard installations from non-standard repositories, is to work with the Debian and Ubuntu packagers to streamline the packaging of new Sugar releases in order to get them into the upgrade stream in a timely manner. If somebody involved in the process can explain exactly what is needed, I expect that we can recruit some more helpers. (Similarly for RPM packaging for Red Hat and other distributions that use that format.) On Debian, Sugar is several releases behind (0.90, which has a severely broken Collaboration stack, is the latest offer). That should be fixed; the best way to get efforts going again is to show the people involved (especially Jonas Smedegaard) that there's real interest from users in (packaged) Sugar on Debian. On Ubuntu, the situation is worse (and has been for about 3 years [1]) and not as easy to fix. Apart from normal bugs that impact Sugar (e.g. Xephyr doesn't work [2], breaking sugar-emulator), they completely dropped the python-xpcom package [3], breaking Browse. But as Browse is in the process of moving to WebkitGTK [4], there's finally a chance to have a non-crippled Sugar on Ubuntu in a not too distant future. Sascha [1] https://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/729 [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/325706 [3] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/480407/+index [4] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/WebKit -- http://sascha.silbe.org/ http://www.infra-silbe.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Release Poll-28
Activity Homepage: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/addon/4074 Sugar Platform: 0.82 - 0.96 Download Now: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/downloads/file/27877/poll-28.xo Release notes: Sugar Labs Activities http://activities.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
I just updated the wiki page with your suggestions: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Community/Distributions/Ubuntu Thanks; Tom Gilliard On 02/27/2012 12:09 AM, Ma Xiaojun wrote: I made some change to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit/sck/Advanced_Topics#Sweets_Distribution This section is linked from the Ubuntu page. I think it is slightly more clear now. I do not why the section title was used for the maybe most important link. This confused me at least. The raw repository link (rather than apt line) was not so friendly. So I replaced it with the Sweets_Distribution wiki page. People can find real instructions here, at least. Also, because instructions for synaptic is not available yet. I changed synaptic to more general apt. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
I find that the page is even more confusing... Radical changes have been made by me. I don't touch the instructions for desktop Ubuntu, though. Because I need to do testing. I find that the ubuntu's official repository has multiple version of sucrose http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=sucrosesearchon=namessuite=allsection=all ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
The page changed radically again... It is not edited by me. I want to ask that is there an easy-to-install package in Trisquel's official repository? What is it? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:10:52PM +0800, Ma Xiaojun wrote: The page changed radically again... It is not edited by me. That was me. I'm testing Ubuntu install of Sugar now. I want to ask that is there an easy-to-install package in Trisquel's official repository? What is it? I don't know of one. Try sucrose-0.90. Trisquel probably won't have a later version of Sugar than Ubuntu does ... if they did, they would have pushed the work upstream to Ubuntu and Debian. Otherwise, use Sweets. Have you tried that yet? -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
I don't know of one. Try sucrose-0.90. Trisquel probably won't have a later version of Sugar than Ubuntu does ... if they did, they would have pushed the work upstream to Ubuntu and Debian. Otherwise, use Sweets. Have you tried that yet? Testing is not very easy for me. I'm an undergraduate having classes to attend, you know. Sugar's wiki shouldn't be a place for distribution recommendation and/or debate. We'd respect users' origin choices as much as possible. Personally, I don't like distribution switch recommendation. Can anyone prove or disprove whether Trisquel offers practical advantage over Ubuntu with regard to Sugar installation. AFAIK, Trisquel inspired the author of Sweets. This can be mentioned in the Ubuntu page, but it has nothing to do with distribution switch. I just knew Fedora-based SoaS before noticing similar, probably better, Trisquel-based TOAST. TOAST should be useful for anyone who can use a x86 virtual/real machine. It can be mentioned in Ubuntu page because Ubuntu users may expect Ubuntu like command line rather than Fedora command line. TOAST has nothing to do with distribution switch as well. Trisquel's page is not satisfactory also. But my focus would limit to Ubuntu page currently. For Ubuntu Sugar Remix, I notice that their mailing list already have had spams for some times. It seems that the origin team is not there any more. Maybe I should try to ask mainstream Ubuntu people directly. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [ANNOUNCE] Sweets Distribution
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 03:39:06PM +, Aleksey Lim wrote: === Sweets Distribution 0.94 === Testing [[Dextrose/2|Dextrose 3]] based releases: * [http://download.sugarlabs.org/packages/SweetsDistribution:/0.94/Ubuntu-11.04/ Ubuntu-11.04] I see only Ubuntu-11.04 is present there. Do you plan to package for Ubuntu-11.10 or Ubuntu-12.04? -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [ANNOUNCE] Sweets Distribution
I have same question. I know packaging maybe hard. But user would expect Sugar for all Ubuntu versions have official support. Maybe the author focuses on 11.04 because Trisquel 5.0 is based on 11.04. Hmm. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Can we be a little more friendly to Ubuntu users
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 01:56:03PM +0800, Ma Xiaojun wrote: I don't know of one. ?Try sucrose-0.90. ?Trisquel probably won't have a later version of Sugar than Ubuntu does ... if they did, they would have pushed the work upstream to Ubuntu and Debian. Otherwise, use Sweets. ?Have you tried that yet? Testing is not very easy for me. I'm an undergraduate having classes to attend, you know. Well, I've tested Sweets just now, and it works well. It is worth the small number of extra commands to cut and paste. Sweets includes many more activities than the Ubuntu packages do. Browse works fine on Sweets. Browse does not work at all when using the Ubuntu packages. I recommend you try Sweets. Sugar's wiki shouldn't be a place for distribution recommendation and/or debate. [...] On the one hand, yes, it should be a place, because we want users to use Sugar. If that means we have to admit that using a particular distribution won't give them a good experience, or that they would need a degree in software engineering to install Sugar properly, then so be it. We'd respect users' origin choices as much as possible. Personally, I don't like distribution switch recommendation. Can anyone prove or disprove whether Trisquel offers practical advantage over Ubuntu with regard to Sugar installation. I agree, I don't like the switch recommendation either, but mainly because it doesn't answer the question I've got Ubuntu and I want to use Sugar, how do I do it?. I've removed it. Thanks! AFAIK, Trisquel inspired the author of Sweets. This can be mentioned in the Ubuntu page, but it has nothing to do with distribution switch. I just knew Fedora-based SoaS before noticing similar, probably better, Trisquel-based TOAST. TOAST should be useful for anyone who can use a x86 virtual/real machine. It can be mentioned in Ubuntu page because Ubuntu users may expect Ubuntu like command line rather than Fedora command line. TOAST has nothing to do with distribution switch as well. Hmm. Yes, I agree, but I'd rather the Ubuntu page not be cluttered and disorganised. These things could go in the Talk page. Trisquel's page is not satisfactory also. But my focus would limit to Ubuntu page currently. I agree. I've focused on the Ubuntu page, because I felt it was an important distribution with a large user base. For Ubuntu Sugar Remix, I notice that their mailing list already have had spams for some times. It seems that the origin team is not there any more. Maybe I should try to ask mainstream Ubuntu people directly. Jonas in the Debian team seems to be aware of the status. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
