On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
set of questions which will determine the future viability of Sugar.
If anyone as more informed, please correct me if I am sharing
incorrect
My suggestion to integrate activitycetral/dxs into XSCE/xsce
preserving history and using a branch for easier comparison is:
1. revert xsce/master to fa2d59,
2. create a 'dxs' branch
3. merge activitycentral/dxs commits to this new branch preserving history
This new branch (XSCE/xsce@dxs) will
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
set of questions which will determine the future viability of
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:48 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
wrote:
[snip]
I don't understand what you are asking. Sugar Labs has always had a
policy of working in the open.
The degree of openness
Hi Chris,
I am working on a home page for the xsce schoolserver, which I would like to
localize. The method I have used is to turn on multiviews and have
index.en.php, index.es.php, etc. which each have any arbitrary text in the
appropriate language and also make calls, currently to php
I think this approach makes sense. As I understand it:
* We want to be good historians and follow the proper workflow, which also
implies that master should ideally never be broken.
* While we are switching to ansible, we do the switch *in a branch* called
dxs and *not master*
* All fixes and
which commit was fa2d59?
This is the same discussion we had yesterday about when we move from dxs to
xsce. What would be the criteria for deciding to merge the dxs branch into
master?
And it still doesn’t address the question of where ongoing differences between
dxs and xsce will live.
I’m
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Tim Moody t...@timmoody.com wrote:
which commit was fa2d59?
Merge pull request #3 from jvonau/masterjv
I think he means revert *till* ^^
The commit after that was:
Copy all files from DXS upto commit Merge pull request #52 from
scollazo/featu...
On 10/07/2013 09:51 PM, James Cameron wrote:
Don't number it 0.4.5, instead number it 0.5, and push any plans you
had for 0.5 out to 0.6. The sooner you get to 1.0 the more acceptable
the version number will become. 0.4, based on the descriptions I see,
is already 1.0 fodder.
We have just
For the upcoming 0.5 release, we will be targeting the following hardware
architectures:
* Trim-Slice
* XO-1.5, XO-1.75, X0-4
* i386
* x86_64
Feel free to provide XSCE support for other architectures, but these are the
ones we believe are most useful to the user community.
Martin
Exactly! I also think it is a risk to have development being done in
xsce:dxs. I would be in favor of just creating a xsce:dxs with all the dxs
commits, so we don't lose the history, and then we just merge that to the
xsce:master branch and just continue working there.
WhatSay?
OK, but what
There should be none. There might be a 100 commits (the dxs history)
instead of the current 1 commit, but the end result of those 100 will be
the same.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Tim Moody t...@timmoody.com wrote:
Exactly! I also think it is a risk to have development being done in
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Martin Dluhos mar...@gnu.org wrote:
On 10/07/2013 09:51 PM, James Cameron wrote:
Don't number it 0.4.5, instead number it 0.5, and push any plans you
had for 0.5 out to 0.6. The sooner you get to 1.0 the more acceptable
the version number will become. 0.4,
my branch will be one commit behind, the commit of the merge of dxs into master
Tim
From: Anish Mangal
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 4:17 PM
To: xsce-devel
Cc: server-devel
Subject: Re: [XSCE] XSCE/xsce and activitycetral/dxs repository integration in
a branch preserving history
There
Maybe git rebase --interactive commit will fix it without much headache
for you
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Tim Moody t...@timmoody.com wrote:
my branch will be one commit behind, the commit of the merge of dxs
into master
Tim
*From:* Anish Mangal an...@activitycentral.com
After some discussion at the sprint, I looked for documentation of the
workflow as I understand it:
https://www.atlassian.com/git/workflows#!workflow-forking
I found it helpful
___
Server-devel mailing list
Server-devel@lists.laptop.org
Here's a video that Miguel created that explains it quite well too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEE85F3Zjcs
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 2:38 PM, George Hunt georgejh...@gmail.com wrote:
After some discussion at the sprint, I looked for documentation of the
workflow as I understand it:
On 10/23/2013 02:38 PM, George Hunt wrote:
After some discussion at the sprint, I looked for documentation of the
workflow
as I understand it:
https://www.atlassian.com/git/workflows#!workflow-forking
https://www.atlassian.com/git/workflows#%21workflow-forking
In case, the selected
Santi wrote some excellent documentation on
https://sugardextrose.org/projects/dxs/wiki/git
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Martin Dluhos mar...@gnu.org wrote:
On 10/23/2013 02:38 PM, George Hunt wrote:
After some discussion at the sprint, I looked for documentation of the
workflow
as I
On 2013-10-23 13:04, Martin Dluhos wrote:
For the upcoming 0.5 release, we will be targeting the following
hardware
architectures:
* Trim-Slice
* XO-1.5, XO-1.75, X0-4
* i386
* x86_64
Feel free to provide XSCE support for other architectures, but these
are the
ones we believe are most
Does the $100 model have an enclosure for the hard drive? (even if the hard
drive itself is not present)
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Alex Kleider aklei...@sonic.net wrote:
On 2013-10-23 13:04, Martin Dluhos wrote:
For the upcoming 0.5 release, we will be targeting the following hardware
21 matches
Mail list logo
