Re: [Sugar-devel] Arch Linux XO image and Sugar packages
On 7 October 2013 05:14, Sebastian Silva sebast...@fuentelibre.org wrote: El 05/10/13 18:59, Daniel Narvaez escribió: * AUR -git packages for the Sugar core and the browse activity. They makes it pretty easy to install the very latest sugar. (I tested them on my laptop, not on the XO yet). Nice to hear, I've had a 0.96 on my laptop since I switched to Arch based distro and it was not much use. I tried your packages and my test reports sugar-git installed jarabe in python3.3's site-packages instead of python2.7, so it won't start Good catch, I probably had no python3 installed when I tested these, so I had not seen the issue. I just opened a pull request that should solve it https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/104 Thanks! ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] Template:Activity-oneline
Just a heads up that I made a slight change to http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Template:Activity-oneline Rather than linking to non-existent activity pages in wiki.laptop.org, I have it link to wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activities/ I don't think this impacts the updater, just the display of the pages in the wiki. But just in case, feel free to revert. regards. -walter -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] Build broken in sugar-web checks
http://buildbot.sugarlabs.org/builders/quick/builds/265/steps/shell_2/logs/log -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
As a data point for other decision makers and a follow up to some of the recent threads on the future of Sugar, I would like to share Activity Central's Sugar priorities for the next six months. Activity Central supports the recent HTML5 + JS work that is going into sugar .100. It has the potential to take the OLPC vision to any device which runs a browser while simultaneously increasing the potential activity developer pool by several orders of magnitude. This is an excellent area for community lead research. Activity Central will be doing activity side work to test the viability of the framework for client deployments. As a more incremental approach, Activity Central will continue our deployment-centric work by porting Dextrose to Ubuntu. A concern among deployments is the future availability of hardware to support their current investment. Deployments are concerned that laptop support will stop before tablets are ready for use in the field. Because of the controversial nature of this work and the potential for disruption it may cause to the Association, we understand if some people would prefer to sit this out. Would either of these list be appropriate to continue these discussions about this downstream efforts to port sugar to Ubuntu for use on hardware not sold by the Association? Phase one has been a poof of concept as seen at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Ubuntu (ongoing) Phase two will be opening the project to the community. Phases three will be testing and piloting by deployments. -- David Farning Activity Central: http://www.activitycentral.com ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Release Gears-5
Activity Homepage: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/addon/4696 Sugar Platform: 0.100 - 0.100 Download Now: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/downloads/file/28778/gears-5.xo Release notes: Forgot to add the new CSS files Sugar Labs Activities http://activities.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] A robotics session at OLPC SF?
We have the Uruguay Butia robot, a couple of LEGO WeDo kits and a Mindstorms NXT box that we can provide. Any takers on running a session on robotics at the OLPC SF Community Summit 2013? http://www.olpcsf.org/CommunitySummit2013/proposal cheers, Sameer -- Sameer Verma, Ph.D. Professor, Information Systems San Francisco State University http://verma.sfsu.edu/ http://commons.sfsu.edu/ http://olpcsf.org/ http://olpcjamaica.org.jm/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Build broken in sugar-web checks
On 7 October 2013 18:59, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: 2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: http://buildbot.sugarlabs.org/builders/quick/builds/265/steps/shell_2/logs/log Oh, we have to change the check. Now sugar.less is imported by sugar-*.less, so those are the ones we need to check. Will recess check the imported code that way? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Build broken in sugar-web checks
2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: http://buildbot.sugarlabs.org/builders/quick/builds/265/steps/shell_2/logs/log Oh, we have to change the check. Now sugar.less is imported by sugar-*.less, so those are the ones we need to check. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Arch Linux XO image and Sugar packages
Hello, I setup a buildbot instance to build the packages daily, using the XO as a build slave for arm http://sugarlabs.org:8011/waterfall https://github.com/dnarvaez/archbot You can pull them by adding this to your /etc/pacman.conf [sugar] SigLevel = Never Server = http://sugarlabs.org/~dnarvaez/archsugar/$arch I tested them on my laptop and on the XO. Though Arch Linux Arm supports a lot of devices, including the Raspberry PI http://archlinuxarm.org/platforms If you have any of these please give it a try, I'd be happy to try to fix stuff up if it doesn't work for some reason. (I have armv7 packages but not armv6 and armv5 yet, as you can see from the buildbot, hopefully I will figure out those soon). ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
Disclaimer: These are my personal views, and are not the official views of OLPC. - It should be fine to discuss anything Sugar-related on the sugarlabs.org development lists. Sugar Labs does not use any OLPC hosting services, and is an independent group as part of the Software Freedom Conservancy. - I cannot comment on future OLPC hardware plans. If OLPC was to publicly announce their intent to go in a similar direction the laptop.org mailing lists might be appropriate; however otherwise they may not be. It sounds like you are discussing a software change for different hardware than anything OLPC related though. Other vendors besides OLPC have sold laptops with Sugar preinstalled on top of Fedora or Ubuntu in the past, so you are not breaking new ground. - Updating the Sugar release in Ubuntu sounds like something everyone could benefit from, not just Dextrose users. Is there any reason not to base most of this work starting with upstream Sugar existing Ubuntu packages? - In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. While some of these changes may make it back upstream it would be nice to see EduJAM and OLPC-SF discussion about trying to limit this. I know Activity Central is trying to publicly state a bit what they're up to, and Walter does his weekly state of the union reports. I also personally hear some private updates as well. But the different working styles of the various groups is starting to confuse me as to which way Sugar is going as a whole. On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:41 PM, David Farning dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote: As a data point for other decision makers and a follow up to some of the recent threads on the future of Sugar, I would like to share Activity Central's Sugar priorities for the next six months. Activity Central supports the recent HTML5 + JS work that is going into sugar .100. It has the potential to take the OLPC vision to any device which runs a browser while simultaneously increasing the potential activity developer pool by several orders of magnitude. This is an excellent area for community lead research. Activity Central will be doing activity side work to test the viability of the framework for client deployments. As a more incremental approach, Activity Central will continue our deployment-centric work by porting Dextrose to Ubuntu. A concern among deployments is the future availability of hardware to support their current investment. Deployments are concerned that laptop support will stop before tablets are ready for use in the field. Because of the controversial nature of this work and the potential for disruption it may cause to the Association, we understand if some people would prefer to sit this out. Would either of these list be appropriate to continue these discussions about this downstream efforts to port sugar to Ubuntu for use on hardware not sold by the Association? Phase one has been a poof of concept as seen at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Ubuntu (ongoing) Phase two will be opening the project to the community. Phases three will be testing and piloting by deployments. -- David Farning Activity Central: http://www.activitycentral.com ___ Devel mailing list de...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Build broken in sugar-web checks
2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: On 7 October 2013 18:59, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: 2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: http://buildbot.sugarlabs.org/builders/quick/builds/265/steps/shell_2/logs/log Oh, we have to change the check. Now sugar.less is imported by sugar-*.less, so those are the ones we need to check. Will recess check the imported code that way? Yes. There is also an --includePath setting for additional directory paths, but I think we don't need it. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Build broken in sugar-web checks
What about skipping less files whose first line is exactly // recess: ignore Adding a list of files to ignore in sugar-build would suck a bit. On 7 October 2013 19:26, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: 2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: On 7 October 2013 18:59, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: 2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: http://buildbot.sugarlabs.org/builders/quick/builds/265/steps/shell_2/logs/log Oh, we have to change the check. Now sugar.less is imported by sugar-*.less, so those are the ones we need to check. Will recess check the imported code that way? Yes. There is also an --includePath setting for additional directory paths, but I think we don't need it. -- .. manuq .. -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On 7 October 2013 19:24, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org wrote: - Updating the Sugar release in Ubuntu sounds like something everyone could benefit from, not just Dextrose users. Is there any reason not to base most of this work starting with upstream Sugar existing Ubuntu packages? +1 - In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. Can you elaborate on this one? I haven't noticed this kind of change (and we have not been reviewing most patches on the mailing list since a long long time, well before the github switch). ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On 7 October 2013 18:41, David Farning dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote: Would either of these list be appropriate to continue these discussions about this downstream efforts to port sugar to Ubuntu for use on hardware not sold by the Association? Phase one has been a poof of concept as seen at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Ubuntu (ongoing) Phase two will be opening the project to the community. Phases three will be testing and piloting by deployments. I would like to understand better what you mean with porting. It should just be matter of writing package specs (or really fixing the existing ones...), no? If there is any more work involved strongly suggest you first discuss it on this mailing list, then have it done upstream directly. That way the whole community will benefit from your effort and you will benefit from the community input. Upstreaming after the fact rarely works. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Build broken in sugar-web checks
2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: What about skipping less files whose first line is exactly // recess: ignore Adding a list of files to ignore in sugar-build would suck a bit. Fine, Daniel. And yeah the // is the proper way to comment in LESS. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. Can you elaborate on this one? I haven't noticed this kind of change (and we have not been reviewing most patches on the mailing list since a long long time, well before the github switch). I think the change was the movement to github. If we can add sugar-devel mailing list to the github mail destinations, that can be solved. Gonzalo ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Monday, 7 October 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. Can you elaborate on this one? I haven't noticed this kind of change (and we have not been reviewing most patches on the mailing list since a long long time, well before the github switch). I think the change was the movement to github. If we can add sugar-devel mailing list to the github mail destinations, that can be solved. I was mostly concerned about Samuel feeling that everyone is developing they're own version of Sugar. I don't see that or at least I don't see differences with the past. We probably can have sugar-devel as email destination... Though I'm not sure why people wouldn't just watch the modules they are interested in? It seems more flexible. Anyway not opposed to send all modules to the whole mailing list if there is consensus on that. -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 October 2013 18:41, David Farning dfarn...@activitycentral.comwrote: Would either of these list be appropriate to continue these discussions about this downstream efforts to port sugar to Ubuntu for use on hardware not sold by the Association? Phase one has been a poof of concept as seen at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Ubuntu (ongoing) Phase two will be opening the project to the community. Phases three will be testing and piloting by deployments. I would like to understand better what you mean with porting. It should just be matter of writing package specs (or really fixing the existing ones...), no? I agree. Have Sugar working on Ubuntu would be great, but would be mainly: * Solve dependencies in ubuntu (update/fix packages) * Make Sugar work with other dependencies when is not possible. In the first case, upstream is Ubuntu, in the second case, upstream is Sugarlabs. In both cases, working with upstream is the best solution in the long run, while I understand for Dextrose is useful have some exclusive features, I hope you avoid the shortcut and plan thinking in the future. Gonzalo If there is any more work involved strongly suggest you first discuss it on this mailing list, then have it done upstream directly. That way the whole community will benefit from your effort and you will benefit from the community input. Upstreaming after the fact rarely works. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:41 PM, David Farning dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote: As a more incremental approach, Activity Central will continue our deployment-centric work by porting Dextrose to Ubuntu. From a deploy to XOs PoV that sounds like a ton of work. You'll grind against a lot of little problems. Fedora is no longer behind nor problematic. That was very much true in earlier times. Some innovative things in Fedora (ie: systemd) have been very well integrated with the Sugar stack. And some changes in the Ubuntu pipeline are likely to cause some havoc. From a work for AC customers already using Ubuntu, it probably makes more sense. Still, the odd directions Ubuntu seems to be going are a bit of a wildcard. I honestly hope that they settle a bit and make life for their downstreams a bit easier. cheers, m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first ~ http://docs.moodle.org/en/User:Martin_Langhoff ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
I agree with Martin on the odd directions Ubuntu is exhibiting; it may be safer to target Debian instead, from which support for Ubuntu will generally follow. (On the other hand, I lack evidence to agree with claims about the stability or direction of Fedora. So few people I know use it.) -- 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] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
Daniel Narvaez wrote: Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Daniel wrote: Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Samuel Wrote: In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. Can you elaborate on this one? I haven't noticed this kind of change (and we have not been reviewing most patches on the mailing list since a long long time, well before the github switch). I think the change was the movement to github. If we can add sugar-devel mailing list to the github mail destinations, that can be solved. I was mostly concerned about Samuel feeling that everyone is developing they're own version of Sugar. I don't see that or at least I don't see differences with the past. I agree with Samuel; that with the loss of public review of patches participation in development has been confined to those who take the trouble to visit a web site. (The reviews by mail were also stimulating other discussion on list). So on the theory that developers are developing with less review (even though it might be unseen greater review), this leads to the conclusion that Sugar is being developed by these developers on their own. And, actually, I'm fine with that. A smaller group can achieve more if they are able to use these new tools effectively. I have not been effective since that change, but you would have seen that a review counter or tracking? Has there been a measure of review rate? We probably can have sugar-devel as email destination... Though I'm not sure why people wouldn't just watch the modules they are interested in? It seems more flexible. Anyway not opposed to send all modules to the whole mailing list if there is consensus on that. I don't see how watching the modules they are interested in is more flexible, nor whether greater flexibility increases the communication. Please don't configure github to send links to the patches; they have to be the patches themselves. They should also have a from address that matches the originator. What used to happen was easy. Get a mail with the patch. Scroll it down while reviewing it. When the cognitive dissonance hits a threshold, hit the reply button and begin a comment. Press send. Mail is a store and forward architecture. I can use mail without having to wait for an internet connection. Github is not so lucky: $ ping -n github.com rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 288.440/606.297/1049.233/262.776 ms, pipe 2 -- 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] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On 7 October 2013 23:39, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: I agree with Samuel; that with the loss of public review of patches participation in development has been confined to those who take the trouble to visit a web site. (The reviews by mail were also stimulating other discussion on list). So on the theory that developers are developing with less review (even though it might be unseen greater review), this leads to the conclusion that Sugar is being developed by these developers on their own. Well everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar seems to be more than that. But maybe I'm just reading too much into it. There aren't multiple groups of people or individuals developing sugar on their own. As far as I know all the work that is being done these days is going upstream. And, actually, I'm fine with that. A smaller group can achieve more if they are able to use these new tools effectively. I have not been effective since that change, but you would have seen that a review counter or tracking? I can't parse this question. Has there been a measure of review rate? We usually have 1 reviewer per patch. All the patches that have been submitted so far has been reviewed and landed. We probably can have sugar-devel as email destination... Though I'm not sure why people wouldn't just watch the modules they are interested in? It seems more flexible. Anyway not opposed to send all modules to the whole mailing list if there is consensus on that. I don't see how watching the modules they are interested in is more flexible, nor whether greater flexibility increases the communication. Because if we send patches to the mailing I'm pretty sure some people will be annoyed. In fact someone got annoyed when he was added to the reviewers group and started getting email. Please don't configure github to send links to the patches; they have to be the patches themselves. They should also have a from address that matches the originator. I highly doubt what you want is possible, at least without doing substantial work... If you have time feel free. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Release Image Viewer-59
Can I have a tar file for this release please? Peter On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Sugar Labs Activities activit...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Activity Homepage: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/addon/4032 Sugar Platform: 0.98 - 0.100 Download Now: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/downloads/file/28766/image_viewer-59.xo Release notes: - Enable collaboration only when a file is loaded - SL#4549 - Replace the gtk dialog used to show transferece progress by a Alert - Pep8 fixes - New activity icon Sugar Labs Activities http://activities.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
2013/10/7 James Cameron qu...@laptop.org: Daniel Narvaez wrote: Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Daniel wrote: Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Samuel Wrote: In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. Can you elaborate on this one? I haven't noticed this kind of change (and we have not been reviewing most patches on the mailing list since a long long time, well before the github switch). I think the change was the movement to github. If we can add sugar-devel mailing list to the github mail destinations, that can be solved. I was mostly concerned about Samuel feeling that everyone is developing they're own version of Sugar. I don't see that or at least I don't see differences with the past. I agree with Samuel; that with the loss of public review of patches participation in development has been confined to those who take the trouble to visit a web site. (The reviews by mail were also stimulating other discussion on list). So on the theory that developers are developing with less review (even though it might be unseen greater review), this leads to the conclusion that Sugar is being developed by these developers on their own. And, actually, I'm fine with that. A smaller group can achieve more if they are able to use these new tools effectively. I have not been effective since that change, but you would have seen that a review counter or tracking? Has there been a measure of review rate? We probably can have sugar-devel as email destination... Though I'm not sure why people wouldn't just watch the modules they are interested in? It seems more flexible. Anyway not opposed to send all modules to the whole mailing list if there is consensus on that. I don't see how watching the modules they are interested in is more flexible, nor whether greater flexibility increases the communication. James, Sam, I see this as a question of taste. At least starters find very odd emails with patch format in pain text. At least one reviewer (me) find very odd copy/pasting the email content to a file in order to give the patch a test. And we had the problem of email-patches being forgotten in the flow of threads. That is fixed, with zero patches in queue. As Daniel said, you can receive email notifications from GitHub by watching repositories. Please don't configure github to send links to the patches; they have to be the patches themselves. They should also have a from address that matches the originator. What used to happen was easy. Get a mail with the patch. Scroll it down while reviewing it. When the cognitive dissonance hits a threshold, hit the reply button and begin a comment. Press send. Mail is a store and forward architecture. I can use mail without having to wait for an internet connection. Github is not so lucky: $ ping -n github.com rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 288.440/606.297/1049.233/262.776 ms, pipe 2 -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list de...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On 8 October 2013 00:08, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: James, Sam, I see this as a question of taste. Exactly. The sooner people understand that, the sooner we will stop having discussions about the review process over and over :) ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 12:00:47AM +0200, Daniel Narvaez wrote: Well everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar seems to be more than that. But maybe I'm just reading too much into it. There aren't multiple groups of people or individuals developing sugar on their own. As far as I know all the work that is being done these days is going upstream. Good. I only know of four Sugars. Sugar upstream, Dextrose, what is in OLPC OS, and what is in the Australian builds. There might be more, but I'm not aware of them. I also don't know the difference between each. -- 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] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 10:10 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: I agree with Martin on the odd directions Ubuntu is exhibiting; it may be safer to target Debian instead, from which support for Ubuntu will generally follow. (On the other hand, I lack evidence to agree with claims about the stability or direction of Fedora. So few people I know use it.) So few people I know use Windows but that doesn't mean it's no longer prevalent, from what I've seen there's been quite a large swing back to it due to the problems with Ubuntu and most of the upstream developers of a lot of the stack that sugar relies upon now use Fedora as their core development OS because of the issues they see with Ubuntu. Peter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [support-gang] Helping test Sugar 0.100
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote: No, I never had a koji user. How can I have one? Become a Fedora packager. Peter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On 8 October 2013 00:22, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 12:00:47AM +0200, Daniel Narvaez wrote: Well everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar seems to be more than that. But maybe I'm just reading too much into it. There aren't multiple groups of people or individuals developing sugar on their own. As far as I know all the work that is being done these days is going upstream. Good. I only know of four Sugars. Sugar upstream, Dextrose, what is in OLPC OS, and what is in the Australian builds. There might be more, but I'm not aware of them. I also don't know the difference between each. Australia builds have apparently a few non-yet-upstreamed patches. Both Gonzalo and Walter are very much involved in upstream work, I'm absolutely confident they will upstream as soon as it make sense. OLPC OS is pretty much all upstream, as far as I know. Dextrose. I know they accumulated non-upstream patches in the past. We landed a couple of features coming from there before the freeze. I'm not sure what is going on these days, which is why I wanted to know more from David about the porting they are doing. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Next release
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: It sounds like it might be an opportunity for upstream to get feedback from real users, which we need desperately. So I think it would be a good idea to refocus 0.100 around this deployment. So 1 Stay in bugfixing mode until January or when things are ready anyway. What about Sugar on a Stick? We're aiming for a release as usual in conjunction with the release of Fedora 20. It would be better to get out a stable release in time for that to get wider testing and then do 0.100.x releases between then and January. Peter 2 Make sure web activities works great on the OS you guys are shipping. On 3 October 2013 17:23, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry I was not able to join the earlier discussion. One data point: In Australia, we are planning to release Sugar 100 (plus some patches we hope to upstream to Sugar 102) to a few schools for extensive testing (the build we are calling 1B). The intention is a broader-based release of Sugar 100 (1C) in January if the testing/bug fixing goes well. These builds are F18-based... don't see that changing in the short term due to lack of support for F19 on the OLPC hardware. +1 to devoting the hackfest in .PY to testing/bug fixing. -walter On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: For the record, this is the chat we had today in #sugar dnarvaez, tch and me: manuq dnarvaez, I'm thinking about the release.. dnarvaez_ heh me too a bit... dnarvaez_ somewhat lost dnarvaez_ I'm not sure if anyone depends on 0.100 being released soon btw manuq dnarvaez, yeah manuq on one hand, people had rpms to test just recently dnarvaez_ yeah, those didn't really generate bug reports though manuq on the other, I don't know if even with that, people will invest time testing manuq in the Paraguay meeting, EduJAM, there will be a sprint manuq I'll be there to push people to test and report bugs manuq maybe that sprint helps a bit dnarvaez_ that's cool dnarvaez_ I wonder if it would be better to focus on bringing web activities everywhere, and go maintenace only for native sugar dnarvaez_ there seem to be little point to develop new native features if people don't even bother testing them dnarvaez_ web activities could potentially work everywhere, so maybe they have a wider audience manuq dnarvaez, yes, I think this has to be planned with deploys, I hope the meeting in Paraguay helps with this too manuq yes manuq there are countries using very old Sugar releases dnarvaez_ from the ml it seems like most are :/ tch__ manuq: you should do a workshop for sugar html5 acivities devel dnarvaez_ I guess it's either figure out how to get those to upgrade dnarvaez_ or make sugar-web work on those releases manuq tch__, yes, I will. It will be the Sunday tch__ manuq: great! manuq dnarvaez, +1 manuq dnarvaez, with gonzalo we made sugar-web work in previous releases (WebKit1) tch__ dnarvaez_: paraguay has 0.88 but we are planning to move to something newer, probably at february 2014 manuq tch__, that's great news dnarvaez_ the fact that developers are not dogfooding is also a big issue, but not sure there is a solution for that, we are not our target user dnarvaez_ tch__: great manuq dnarvaez, I think the community is in a transition too, previous releases were handled almost exclusively by olpc people, and we were the ones fixing most of the bugs manuq now the community has to give a step further tch__ manuq: dnarvaez_ this problem is not new, deployments move in a diffrent pace than we do, and we need to figureout how to solve it manuq tch__, yeah dnarvaez_ manuq: yeah though in the new situation I'm not sure who has interest to bring out the release at all... I'm not sure soas has any real users and deployments seems content with the old releases (or too scared to update :P) tch__ dnarvaez_: manuq testing doesn't get done because what we do today lands 2 yars after to real users tch__ dnarvaez_: today updating is a big logistic problem for deployments, but there is also some level of fear to change dnarvaez_ tch__: and the lack of testing surely doesn't incourage deployments to update sooner, because quality is low... tch__ dnarvaez_: the thing is that real testing == real users tch__ dnarvaez_: we need to break the vicious circle manuq what if deploys sponsor a few children for testing? dnarvaez_ it would be nice to get at least one deployment to upgrade and report their issues tch__ dnarvaez_: manuq we did that with the first dextrose version and it went really well, dnarvaez_ but I'm not sure how/if that's possible, I have no idea of what is going on in the deployments dnarvaez_ manuq: sounds like a nice idea manuq well, at least the ones with XO-4 had to upgrade to get the touchscreen features tch__ dnarvaez_:
Re: [Sugar-devel] Next release
On 8 October 2013 00:43, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: It sounds like it might be an opportunity for upstream to get feedback from real users, which we need desperately. So I think it would be a good idea to refocus 0.100 around this deployment. So 1 Stay in bugfixing mode until January or when things are ready anyway. What about Sugar on a Stick? We're aiming for a release as usual in conjunction with the release of Fedora 20. It would be better to get out a stable release in time for that to get wider testing and then do 0.100.x releases between then and January. Hi, since we are in bugfixing mode, I think in practice releasing 0.100 or not will make no difference to soas. In terms of code quality that is. I'm fine with releasing 0.100 in time for Fedora 20 though if you like. The next release is on 31/10 and my plan would be to keep doing releases every 4 weeks after that. Which one would you like to be called 0.100? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Next release
If a branch is going to be declared, we will need to address it in Pootle as well. Please advise. On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 October 2013 00:43, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: It sounds like it might be an opportunity for upstream to get feedback from real users, which we need desperately. So I think it would be a good idea to refocus 0.100 around this deployment. So 1 Stay in bugfixing mode until January or when things are ready anyway. What about Sugar on a Stick? We're aiming for a release as usual in conjunction with the release of Fedora 20. It would be better to get out a stable release in time for that to get wider testing and then do 0.100.x releases between then and January. Hi, since we are in bugfixing mode, I think in practice releasing 0.100 or not will make no difference to soas. In terms of code quality that is. I'm fine with releasing 0.100 in time for Fedora 20 though if you like. The next release is on 31/10 and my plan would be to keep doing releases every 4 weeks after that. Which one would you like to be called 0.100? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Next release
Hi, I think we should certainly *not* branch until January/Australia release. If anyone disagrees now it's the time to speak up. Really, looking forward I think we should switch to continuous development and never branch again. But that certainly will require more discussion. On 8 October 2013 01:10, Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com wrote: If a branch is going to be declared, we will need to address it in Pootle as well. Please advise. On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 October 2013 00:43, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: It sounds like it might be an opportunity for upstream to get feedback from real users, which we need desperately. So I think it would be a good idea to refocus 0.100 around this deployment. So 1 Stay in bugfixing mode until January or when things are ready anyway. What about Sugar on a Stick? We're aiming for a release as usual in conjunction with the release of Fedora 20. It would be better to get out a stable release in time for that to get wider testing and then do 0.100.x releases between then and January. Hi, since we are in bugfixing mode, I think in practice releasing 0.100 or not will make no difference to soas. In terms of code quality that is. I'm fine with releasing 0.100 in time for Fedora 20 though if you like. The next release is on 31/10 and my plan would be to keep doing releases every 4 weeks after that. Which one would you like to be called 0.100? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
My 2 cents: Since the switch to github, we've have a much better turn-around on reviews and we've attacked new reviewers. I think those data speak for themselves. As Daniel said, we welcome help further shaping the process. regards. -walter On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: 2013/10/7 James Cameron qu...@laptop.org: Daniel Narvaez wrote: Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Daniel wrote: Gonzalo Odiard wrote: Samuel Wrote: In general one of my frustrations lately is that now that we no longer publicly review patches on this mailing list, everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar. Can you elaborate on this one? I haven't noticed this kind of change (and we have not been reviewing most patches on the mailing list since a long long time, well before the github switch). I think the change was the movement to github. If we can add sugar-devel mailing list to the github mail destinations, that can be solved. I was mostly concerned about Samuel feeling that everyone is developing they're own version of Sugar. I don't see that or at least I don't see differences with the past. I agree with Samuel; that with the loss of public review of patches participation in development has been confined to those who take the trouble to visit a web site. (The reviews by mail were also stimulating other discussion on list). So on the theory that developers are developing with less review (even though it might be unseen greater review), this leads to the conclusion that Sugar is being developed by these developers on their own. And, actually, I'm fine with that. A smaller group can achieve more if they are able to use these new tools effectively. I have not been effective since that change, but you would have seen that a review counter or tracking? Has there been a measure of review rate? We probably can have sugar-devel as email destination... Though I'm not sure why people wouldn't just watch the modules they are interested in? It seems more flexible. Anyway not opposed to send all modules to the whole mailing list if there is consensus on that. I don't see how watching the modules they are interested in is more flexible, nor whether greater flexibility increases the communication. James, Sam, I see this as a question of taste. At least starters find very odd emails with patch format in pain text. At least one reviewer (me) find very odd copy/pasting the email content to a file in order to give the patch a test. And we had the problem of email-patches being forgotten in the flow of threads. That is fixed, with zero patches in queue. As Daniel said, you can receive email notifications from GitHub by watching repositories. Please don't configure github to send links to the patches; they have to be the patches themselves. They should also have a from address that matches the originator. What used to happen was easy. Get a mail with the patch. Scroll it down while reviewing it. When the cognitive dissonance hits a threshold, hit the reply button and begin a comment. Press send. Mail is a store and forward architecture. I can use mail without having to wait for an internet connection. Github is not so lucky: $ ping -n github.com rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 288.440/606.297/1049.233/262.776 ms, pipe 2 -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Devel mailing list de...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- .. manuq .. ___ Devel mailing list de...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On 8 October 2013 01:07, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org wrote: This actually is kind of what I meant (and perhaps should be a separate thread). To simplify things I will only answer about the 0.100 release cycle. Things have changed a lot anyway and it's probably not worth focusing on the past. My understanding is that deployments nowadays are the primary parties funding Sugar development. And the deployments or their contractors sometimes duplicate work, run into debates upstreaming things, and/or may choose to keep some things semi-private to differentiate their products. There has been debate only about one set of patches which was too big and complicated to review. Someone took care of splitting it up in the end though and it landed. I'm not aware of duplicate work. I'm not aware of semi-private things used to differentiate products. So apart from major functionality like HTML5 activities, a lot of peripheral development is happening downstream-first. And when we do try to do major cross-group development like the GTK3 port, this has lead to finger-pointing behind the scenes where it is claimed others are not doing what they promised. I don't think a lot of development is happening downstream. I have to admit I don't have much visibility about Dextrose/Activity Central though. I think it's fine for some development to land downstream first, as long as it is discussed openly from the beginning. It's often a good way to try things out... To the best of my knowledge no single organization currently employs enough developers and/or contractors to keep Sugar development alive. I am not certain what the best approach to take is when this is the case. I'm more concerned that even summing up the resources, there might not be enough to keep development alive. It really worried me that very little testing, bug triaging and bug fixing is happening for 0.100. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 October 2013 23:39, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote: I agree with Samuel; that with the loss of public review of patches participation in development has been confined to those who take the trouble to visit a web site. (The reviews by mail were also stimulating other discussion on list). So on the theory that developers are developing with less review (even though it might be unseen greater review), this leads to the conclusion that Sugar is being developed by these developers on their own. Well everyone seems to be developing their own version of Sugar seems to be more than that. But maybe I'm just reading too much into it. I am only aware of one group developing their own version of Sugar: Activity Central. There is the Sugar Network project as well, but that is more about glue around Sugar. Gonzalo and I are working with Sugar upstream in Australia (although we are ahead of master in a few places as Sugar 100 has been in freeze). There aren't multiple groups of people or individuals developing sugar on their own. As far as I know all the work that is being done these days is going upstream. regards. -walter -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
2013/10/7 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: I would like to understand better what you mean with porting. It should just be matter of writing package specs (or really fixing the existing ones...), no? Mainly, but since we work with Ubuntu LTS for the deployment's benefit we had to backport patches into gobject-introspection and other libs. Also, there are some bits of code in both Sugar and the activities that assume to be running on Fedora, or even on an XO, and those need cleaning. -- Rubén Rodríguez Activity Central: http://activitycentral.com Facebook: https://activitycentral.com/facebook Google+: https://activitycentral.com/googleplus Twitter: https://activitycentral.com/twitter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Ruben Rodríguez ru...@activitycentral.com wrote: Also, there are some bits of code in both Sugar and the activities that assume to be running on Fedora, or even on an XO, and those need cleaning. Be nice to know about these so we can fix them. thx -- Rubén Rodríguez Activity Central: http://activitycentral.com Facebook: https://activitycentral.com/facebook Google+: https://activitycentral.com/googleplus Twitter: https://activitycentral.com/twitter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
2013/10/7 Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org: I agree. Have Sugar working on Ubuntu would be great, but would be mainly: * Solve dependencies in ubuntu (update/fix packages) * Make Sugar work with other dependencies when is not possible. In the first case, upstream is Ubuntu, in the second case, upstream is Sugarlabs. In both cases, working with upstream is the best solution in the long run, while I understand for Dextrose is useful have some exclusive features, I hope you avoid the shortcut and plan thinking in the future. Idealy, yes. But to make Sugar work with an already released version of Ubuntu there is nothing to upstream as you cannot ask for library updates after the release, so we need to do it on the side. But it would be nice to have the latest Sugar working natively on the next Ubuntu LTS, and that is included in the project plans. -- Rubén Rodríguez Activity Central: http://activitycentral.com Facebook: https://activitycentral.com/facebook Google+: https://activitycentral.com/googleplus Twitter: https://activitycentral.com/twitter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
2013/10/8 Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com: Be nice to know about these so we can fix them. Sure thing! We just finished with the first leg of the project and the resultant image is getting tested now, so soon I'll start sending patches. There are usually small things, like scripts written in bash (ubuntu uses dash), checking for distro specific files or paths, and the like. Anyway most of the work was related to make 0.98 work on Ubuntu 12.04, something that in general would not require upstreaming for either Sugar or Ubuntu. -- Rubén Rodríguez Activity Central: http://activitycentral.com Facebook: https://activitycentral.com/facebook Google+: https://activitycentral.com/googleplus Twitter: https://activitycentral.com/twitter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:00:06AM +0200, Ruben Rodríguez wrote: 2013/10/8 Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com: Be nice to know about these so we can fix them. Sure thing! We just finished with the first leg of the project and the resultant image is getting tested now, so soon I'll start sending patches. There are usually small things, like scripts written in bash (ubuntu uses dash), checking for distro specific files or paths, and the like. I agree, the bash vs dash issue is a small thing, it may be simpler to add bash as a dependency for Sugar. -- 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] Activity Central's Sugar related priorities.
On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 19:48 -0400, Walter Bender wrote: On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Ruben Rodríguez ru...@activitycentral.com wrote: Also, there are some bits of code in both Sugar and the activities that assume to be running on Fedora, or even on an XO, and those need cleaning. Be nice to know about these so we can fix them. You can start by looking for olpc specific paths that are hard-coded in places, here is a starting point: https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/blob/master/extensions/cpsection/power/model.py https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/blob/master/extensions/cpsection/aboutcomputer/model.py https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/blob/master/src/jarabe/controlpanel/gui.py Jerry thx -- Rubén Rodríguez Activity Central: http://activitycentral.com Facebook: https://activitycentral.com/facebook Google+: https://activitycentral.com/googleplus Twitter: https://activitycentral.com/twitter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
