Re: [Sugar-devel] Request to review GSOC proposal

[James Cameron]

Thanks.  I've reviewed it.  I've no comments.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] Request to review GSOC proposal

[Anshuman Bhardwaj]

Hi,
I submitted my proposal draft for sugarizer dashboard on 26th March. I
still haven't heard any comments on it. Can you please review it and give
feedback so I can make a final PDf for it.
Thanks

-- 
Anshuman Bhardwaj
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC proposal (Music Blocks)

[James Cameron]

Thanks for your proposal.  I've reviewed it.  I changed sugarlabs to
Sugar Labs.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC Proposal [Sugar Labs Social]

[Samar Singh Karnawat]

Hello,

Please review and give suggestions on my proposal for Sugar Labs Social.

Also, anyone willing to answer the first question of "You and Community" is
welcome. Please reply to this thread or e-mail me back with the answer so
that I can add it to my proposal.
I also request the mentors for this project to send their answers.

Here is the link to the draft of my proposal:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zr-avki8SMAsjSShBBjZcs25pduJJb6JfvfpLcSt7WA/edit?usp=sharing
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC proposal (Music Blocks)

[James Cameron]

G'day Ritwik,

I'm not a mentor, but I am in the Sugar Labs community.  I don't have
access to the GSoC web site.  If you'd like review by people who are
not mentors, please provide a link.

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 12:52:50AM +0530, Ritwik Abhishek wrote:
> Hello,
> I have submitted my initial draft of proposal with edit access on GSoC 
> website.
> My project is music blocks widget improvements. The mentors are Walter Bender,
> Devin Ulibarri, Sachiko Nakajima and Marnen Laibow-Koser. I request you to
> please review the proposal and write about impact of project on the community.
> Please reply to this mail or ping me on IRC @a-ritwik if you can not find my
> application on GSoC portal.
> Yours sincerely
> Ritwik Abhishek

> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel


-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[James Cameron]

Thanks Yash.  I've reviewed, and have no further comments.

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 05:53:13PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
> *
> Iteration 1 of GSoC : [1]https://docs.google.com/document/d/
> 1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#
> 
> Hello Carlos,
> 
> Thanks for your review. I have already tested every activity I mentioned on 
> the
> list. I have added a buffer week to release to all activities which were not
> released because of testing delay or any hard bug to solve. I am also flexible
> with the timeline I proposed, any changes can be made after discussion with
> mentors. Without actually diving deep into their code, it will be very hard to
> know if any difficult issue will arise. If this case arises, I am willing to
> work extra hours to keep up with the timeline.
>  
> Hello James,
> 
> I have tried to make every change you suggested. Please review.
> 
> Anyone
> 
> ‌
> 
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 3:40 AM, James Cameron <[2]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:26:48PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
> > I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review
> > and give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to
> > port is also welcomed.
> 
> Your work so far on porting activities to GTK+ 3 has been very good,
> so I don't expect any significant problems that can't be solved by
> asking questions or more coding.
> 
> I've reviewed and have some comments;
> 
> - where the proposal template asks "please send us URLs", and "some
>   other demonstration of your work", you might add your GitHub profile
>   URL and some of the pull requests you've worked on recently.  You do
>   mention these much later, but it is good to answer the question.
> 
>   (because although some of us know what you've been doing, the Google
>   Open Source team won't know this until you tell them).
> 
> - use terms consistently and correctly, and avoid unnecessary
>   abbreviations; e.g. "pull request" instead of "PR", "Sugar" instead
>   of "sugar", "Sugar Toolkit" instead of {sugar-toolkit,
>   sugar-toolkit-gtk3}, "Ubuntu" instead of "ubuntu", "Fedora" instead
>   of "fedora", "GTK+ 2" instead of {GTK2, GTK+ 2.x, Gtk, Gtk+},
>   "GStreamer" instead of "GST", and (perhaps) "PyGObject API" instead
>   of "PyGI",
> 
>   (because the inconsistent use within the document, and against
>   external references, makes it harder to read).
> 
> - in your list of activities, use the value for name from
>   [3]activity.info rather than the GitHub repository name,
> 
>   (because this is the name by which the activity is best known to
>   other people,)
> 
> - the activity Labyrinth has a GTK+ 3 port already, and there are
>   several repositories that are not proper clones or forks.  See my
>   audit in [4]https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
> 
> - you might plan how to encourage testing of your work by Sugar Labs
>   community,
> 
> - you might mention how your work will be affected by or benefit from
>   the Port to Python 3 project,
>
> --
> James Cameron
> [5]http://quozl.netrek.org/
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> [6]Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> [7]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> 
> References:
> 
> [1] 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#
> [2] mailto:qu...@laptop.org
> [3] http://activity.info/
> [4] https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
> [5] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> [6] mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> [7] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel


-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC proposal (Music Blocks)

[Ritwik Abhishek]

Hello,
I have submitted my initial draft of proposal with edit access on GSoC
website. My project is music blocks widget improvements. The mentors are
Walter Bender, Devin Ulibarri, Sachiko Nakajima and Marnen Laibow-Koser. I
request you to please review the proposal and write about impact of project
on the community.
Please reply to this mail or ping me on IRC @a-ritwik if you can not find
my application on GSoC portal.
link to my proposal is
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w1QORVYpgXgDtovc67kNb2DJiG6kZAJ2oT5NjNy2klI/edit?usp=sharing
Yours sincerely
Ritwik Abhishek
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

[Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC proposal (Music Blocks)

[Ritwik Abhishek]

Hello,
I have submitted my initial draft of proposal with edit access on GSoC
website. My project is music blocks widget improvements. The mentors are
Walter Bender, Devin Ulibarri, Sachiko Nakajima and Marnen Laibow-Koser. I
request you to please review the proposal and write about impact of project
on the community.
Please reply to this mail or ping me on IRC @a-ritwik if you can not find
my application on GSoC portal.
Yours sincerely
Ritwik Abhishek
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[Walter Bender]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:28 AM Yash Agrawal  wrote:

>
> Anyone willing to fill answer to the first question of "You and Community"
> is more than welcomed. Please e-mail me back with the answer so that I can
> add it to my proposal. I will also request mentors of this project to send
> their answers.
>
> Q: If your project is successfully completed, what will its impact be on
> the Sugar Labs community? Give 3 answers, each 1-3 paragraphs in length.
> The first one should be yours. The other two should be answers from members
> of the Sugar Labs community, at least one of whom should be a Sugar Labs
> GSoC mentor. Provide email contact information for non-GSoC mentors
>

As the world changes, Sugar cannot stand still. If the platforms we depend
upon drop support for the version tools we are using, then we have to
either take over maintenance of these tools ourselves -- a task we are not
resourced to do -- or, as proposed, update our work so that it remains
compatible. The migration to GTK-3 is critical.


>
> Thanks,
> Yash Agrawal
> IRC: yashagrawal3
> ‌
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Yash Agrawal 
> wrote:
>
>> Iteration 1 of GSoC :
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#
>>
>> Hello Carlos,
>>
>> Thanks for your review. I have already tested every activity I mentioned
>> on the list. I have added a buffer week to release to all activities which
>> were not released because of testing delay or any hard bug to solve. I am
>> also flexible with the timeline I proposed, any changes can be made after
>> discussion with mentors. Without actually diving deep into their code, it
>> will be very hard to know if any difficult issue will arise. If this case
>> arises, I am willing to work extra hours to keep up with the timeline.
>>
>> Hello James,
>>
>> I have tried to make every change you suggested. Please review.
>>
>> Anyone
>>
>> ‌
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 3:40 AM, James Cameron  wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:26:48PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
>>> > I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review
>>> > and give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to
>>> > port is also welcomed.
>>>
>>> Your work so far on porting activities to GTK+ 3 has been very good,
>>> so I don't expect any significant problems that can't be solved by
>>> asking questions or more coding.
>>>
>>> I've reviewed and have some comments;
>>>
>>> - where the proposal template asks "please send us URLs", and "some
>>>   other demonstration of your work", you might add your GitHub profile
>>>   URL and some of the pull requests you've worked on recently.  You do
>>>   mention these much later, but it is good to answer the question.
>>>
>>>   (because although some of us know what you've been doing, the Google
>>>   Open Source team won't know this until you tell them).
>>>
>>> - use terms consistently and correctly, and avoid unnecessary
>>>   abbreviations; e.g. "pull request" instead of "PR", "Sugar" instead
>>>   of "sugar", "Sugar Toolkit" instead of {sugar-toolkit,
>>>   sugar-toolkit-gtk3}, "Ubuntu" instead of "ubuntu", "Fedora" instead
>>>   of "fedora", "GTK+ 2" instead of {GTK2, GTK+ 2.x, Gtk, Gtk+},
>>>   "GStreamer" instead of "GST", and (perhaps) "PyGObject API" instead
>>>   of "PyGI",
>>>
>>>   (because the inconsistent use within the document, and against
>>>   external references, makes it harder to read).
>>>
>>> - in your list of activities, use the value for name from
>>>   activity.info rather than the GitHub repository name,
>>>
>>>   (because this is the name by which the activity is best known to
>>>   other people,)
>>>
>>> - the activity Labyrinth has a GTK+ 3 port already, and there are
>>>   several repositories that are not proper clones or forks.  See my
>>>   audit in https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
>>>
>>> - you might plan how to encourage testing of your work by Sugar Labs
>>>   community,
>>>
>>> - you might mention how your work will be affected by or benefit from
>>>   the Port to Python 3 project,
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Cameron
>>> http://quozl.netrek.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
>


-- 
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] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[Yash Agrawal]

Anyone willing to fill answer to the first question of "You and Community"
is more than welcomed. Please e-mail me back with the answer so that I can
add it to my proposal. I will also request mentors of this project to send
their answers.

Q: If your project is successfully completed, what will its impact be on
the Sugar Labs community? Give 3 answers, each 1-3 paragraphs in length.
The first one should be yours. The other two should be answers from members
of the Sugar Labs community, at least one of whom should be a Sugar Labs
GSoC mentor. Provide email contact information for non-GSoC mentors

Thanks,
Yash Agrawal
IRC: yashagrawal3
‌

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Yash Agrawal  wrote:

> Iteration 1 of GSoC : https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_
> j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#
>
> Hello Carlos,
>
> Thanks for your review. I have already tested every activity I mentioned
> on the list. I have added a buffer week to release to all activities which
> were not released because of testing delay or any hard bug to solve. I am
> also flexible with the timeline I proposed, any changes can be made after
> discussion with mentors. Without actually diving deep into their code, it
> will be very hard to know if any difficult issue will arise. If this case
> arises, I am willing to work extra hours to keep up with the timeline.
>
> Hello James,
>
> I have tried to make every change you suggested. Please review.
>
> Anyone
>
> ‌
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 3:40 AM, James Cameron  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:26:48PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
>> > I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review
>> > and give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to
>> > port is also welcomed.
>>
>> Your work so far on porting activities to GTK+ 3 has been very good,
>> so I don't expect any significant problems that can't be solved by
>> asking questions or more coding.
>>
>> I've reviewed and have some comments;
>>
>> - where the proposal template asks "please send us URLs", and "some
>>   other demonstration of your work", you might add your GitHub profile
>>   URL and some of the pull requests you've worked on recently.  You do
>>   mention these much later, but it is good to answer the question.
>>
>>   (because although some of us know what you've been doing, the Google
>>   Open Source team won't know this until you tell them).
>>
>> - use terms consistently and correctly, and avoid unnecessary
>>   abbreviations; e.g. "pull request" instead of "PR", "Sugar" instead
>>   of "sugar", "Sugar Toolkit" instead of {sugar-toolkit,
>>   sugar-toolkit-gtk3}, "Ubuntu" instead of "ubuntu", "Fedora" instead
>>   of "fedora", "GTK+ 2" instead of {GTK2, GTK+ 2.x, Gtk, Gtk+},
>>   "GStreamer" instead of "GST", and (perhaps) "PyGObject API" instead
>>   of "PyGI",
>>
>>   (because the inconsistent use within the document, and against
>>   external references, makes it harder to read).
>>
>> - in your list of activities, use the value for name from
>>   activity.info rather than the GitHub repository name,
>>
>>   (because this is the name by which the activity is best known to
>>   other people,)
>>
>> - the activity Labyrinth has a GTK+ 3 port already, and there are
>>   several repositories that are not proper clones or forks.  See my
>>   audit in https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
>>
>> - you might plan how to encourage testing of your work by Sugar Labs
>>   community,
>>
>> - you might mention how your work will be affected by or benefit from
>>   the Port to Python 3 project,
>>
>> --
>> James Cameron
>> http://quozl.netrek.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] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[Yash Agrawal]

Iteration 1 of GSoC :
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#

Hello Carlos,

Thanks for your review. I have already tested every activity I mentioned on
the list. I have added a buffer week to release to all activities which
were not released because of testing delay or any hard bug to solve. I am
also flexible with the timeline I proposed, any changes can be made after
discussion with mentors. Without actually diving deep into their code, it
will be very hard to know if any difficult issue will arise. If this case
arises, I am willing to work extra hours to keep up with the timeline.

Hello James,

I have tried to make every change you suggested. Please review.

Anyone

‌

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 3:40 AM, James Cameron  wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:26:48PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
> > I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review
> > and give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to
> > port is also welcomed.
>
> Your work so far on porting activities to GTK+ 3 has been very good,
> so I don't expect any significant problems that can't be solved by
> asking questions or more coding.
>
> I've reviewed and have some comments;
>
> - where the proposal template asks "please send us URLs", and "some
>   other demonstration of your work", you might add your GitHub profile
>   URL and some of the pull requests you've worked on recently.  You do
>   mention these much later, but it is good to answer the question.
>
>   (because although some of us know what you've been doing, the Google
>   Open Source team won't know this until you tell them).
>
> - use terms consistently and correctly, and avoid unnecessary
>   abbreviations; e.g. "pull request" instead of "PR", "Sugar" instead
>   of "sugar", "Sugar Toolkit" instead of {sugar-toolkit,
>   sugar-toolkit-gtk3}, "Ubuntu" instead of "ubuntu", "Fedora" instead
>   of "fedora", "GTK+ 2" instead of {GTK2, GTK+ 2.x, Gtk, Gtk+},
>   "GStreamer" instead of "GST", and (perhaps) "PyGObject API" instead
>   of "PyGI",
>
>   (because the inconsistent use within the document, and against
>   external references, makes it harder to read).
>
> - in your list of activities, use the value for name from
>   activity.info rather than the GitHub repository name,
>
>   (because this is the name by which the activity is best known to
>   other people,)
>
> - the activity Labyrinth has a GTK+ 3 port already, and there are
>   several repositories that are not proper clones or forks.  See my
>   audit in https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
>
> - you might plan how to encourage testing of your work by Sugar Labs
>   community,
>
> - you might mention how your work will be affected by or benefit from
>   the Port to Python 3 project,
>
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.netrek.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] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[James Cameron]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:26:48PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
> I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review
> and give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to
> port is also welcomed.

Your work so far on porting activities to GTK+ 3 has been very good,
so I don't expect any significant problems that can't be solved by
asking questions or more coding.

I've reviewed and have some comments;

- where the proposal template asks "please send us URLs", and "some
  other demonstration of your work", you might add your GitHub profile
  URL and some of the pull requests you've worked on recently.  You do
  mention these much later, but it is good to answer the question.

  (because although some of us know what you've been doing, the Google
  Open Source team won't know this until you tell them).

- use terms consistently and correctly, and avoid unnecessary
  abbreviations; e.g. "pull request" instead of "PR", "Sugar" instead
  of "sugar", "Sugar Toolkit" instead of {sugar-toolkit,
  sugar-toolkit-gtk3}, "Ubuntu" instead of "ubuntu", "Fedora" instead
  of "fedora", "GTK+ 2" instead of {GTK2, GTK+ 2.x, Gtk, Gtk+},
  "GStreamer" instead of "GST", and (perhaps) "PyGObject API" instead
  of "PyGI",

  (because the inconsistent use within the document, and against
  external references, makes it harder to read).

- in your list of activities, use the value for name from
  activity.info rather than the GitHub repository name,

  (because this is the name by which the activity is best known to
  other people,)

- the activity Labyrinth has a GTK+ 3 port already, and there are
  several repositories that are not proper clones or forks.  See my
  audit in https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1

- you might plan how to encourage testing of your work by Sugar Labs
  community,

- you might mention how your work will be affected by or benefit from
  the Port to Python 3 project,

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[Carlos mauro]

Hellos Yash

Look very nice your proporal but try to apply a litle revision in a
aplication like block or other because in my experiencie a migration always
request some time to test and may the last aplication migrated have some
bug hard to solve.

Please try in advace review two applivation and found the challenge step
which you will resolve in more time or apply a refactoring.

After that may be you need reduce the activiy number to migrate.


El jue., 22 mar. 2018 11:56 a. m., Yash Agrawal 
escribió:

>
> Hello,
>
> I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review and
> give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to port is
> also welcomed.
>
> Project name: Just say no to GTK2
> Mentors: Ignacio Rodriguez, Cristian Garcia, Abhijit Patel, Ibiam
> Chihurumnaya, Hrishi Patel
>
> link:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Thanks,
> Yash Agrawal
> IRC: yashagrawal3
> ‌
> ___
> 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

[Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[Yash Agrawal]

Hello,

I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review and
give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to port is
also welcomed.

Project name: Just say no to GTK2
Mentors: Ignacio Rodriguez, Cristian Garcia, Abhijit Patel, Ibiam
Chihurumnaya, Hrishi Patel

link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit?usp=sharing

Thanks,
Yash Agrawal
IRC: yashagrawal3
‌
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel