This interests me, I'll be going through resources online to get started with
it.
On Tuesday, July 14, 2020, 3:42:37 PM GMT+5:30, Chihurumnaya Ibiam
wrote:
I agree it would be of great benefit.
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 11:41 PM
I agree it would be of great benefit.
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 11:41 PM James Cameron wrote:
> @Shaan, you've joined the Debian Project as a user, and a bug
> reporter. As user you have installed Debian and used it. As bug
> reporter you
@Shaan, you've joined the Debian Project as a user, and a bug
reporter. As user you have installed Debian and used it. As bug
reporter you have detected a problem and created a bug.
Joining the Debian Project as a developer would make you more
effective in your GSoC role as a Debian advocate
I actually thought you project included making changes downstream, I think
it should.
Submitting PRs downstream shouldn't be a problem, you should be able to
find out information on how.
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 3:56 PM
I can submit bug reports, include PR's in them, but I'm not sure how I would
submit a PR for upstream changes as there are the extra changes required to be
made to get the package working.Perhaps after some success in packaging and
testing locally, I'll be able to submit those changes aswell.
I thought your project was supposed to be you doing downstream updates when
needed.
Who makes the updates?
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 12:03 PM Shaan Subbaiah B C <
shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in> wrote:
> No I can't, I'm not part of Debian
No I can't, I'm not part of Debian Sugar Maintainers team.
On Sat, 11 Jul, 2020, 3:50 pm Chihurumnaya Ibiam, <
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you make the necessary updates downstream?
>
> --
>
> Ibiam Chihurumnaya
> ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 9:42 AM
Can you make the necessary updates downstream?
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 9:42 AM shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in <
shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in> wrote:
> Update,
>
> 1. sugar-record-activity is v102 in the Debian Archive, and is based on
>
Update,
1. sugar-record-activity is v102 in the Debian Archive, and is based on
Python2. The latest release in the Sugar Labs GitHub Repo is v201, based on
Python3.
2. Similarly, sugar-finance-activity is v12 in the Debian Archive, and is based
on Python2. The latest release in the Sugar Labs
Sure! I’ll look into the other activities and try to find out why they aren’t
included.
sugar-etoys-activity is part of the the [contrib] archives as it depends on
etoys which is [non-free]. I should be able to install the package after
enabling non-free packages in my sources.list.
Thanks.
Is there anything you can help with to get those three activities
included? You might first find out why they are not part of the
testing distribution, and see if you can improve the situation.
Is there anything you can do to get other activities included?
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at
Hello all,
I’ve listed the issues found in the Memorize activity. This was the last
activity that I could test on Debian Bullseye.
The remaining activities: sugar-record-activity, sugar-etoys-activity,
sugar-finance-activity from the Sugar Debian Repository are not part of the
Debian Bullseye
Thanks.
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 09:26:08AM +, shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in wrote:
> Hello James,
> Small update; I have been testing Sugar 0.117-3 on Debian Bullseye for the
> past
> few days, there aren’t any noticeable issues I have found that weren’t
> previously mentioned while testing
Hello James,
Small update; I have been testing Sugar 0.117-3 on Debian Bullseye for the past
few days, there aren’t any noticeable issues I have found that weren’t
previously mentioned while testing Sugar 0.117-3 on Debian Buster.
I had mentioned an issue present in the Write Activity in an
I'll put it another way; try not to conflate your progress reporting as part of
GSoC with issue reporting to the community. Nobody is likely to take action on
problems you report in your mail. We have an issue tracking method using
GitHub, which you should use when you discover an issue with
Hello James,
I haven't opened issues for these yet as I'm not certain they're all
reproducible on other Linux distributions. Fortunately, Saumya could reproduce
some of these and has started making PR's for the same.
I didn't want to create multiple issues on Github for which I was not certain
Thanks. Good summary. Details got a bit deep; these can be left for issues
(if you aren't going to fix them) or pull requests (if you are).
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 02:22:13PM +, shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in wrote:
> Hello all,
> This took quite a while, long post ahead. Testing the
Thanks for confirming some of the problems are reproducible.
If I were you, your choices are to either;
(a) fix a problem and make a pull request, connected to any existing issue or
not doesn't matter, what matters is the fix,
(b) not fix a problem and instead create an issue, leaving it for
Nice work
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 4:39 PM Saumya Mishra <2017...@iiitdmj.ac.in> wrote:
> Hello Shaan,
>
> Nice work. I have also tested fructose activities on Ubuntu 20.04 with
> sucrose package version 0.117 , Some of the errors you mentioned are
> reproducible in following activities in Browse,
Hello Shaan,
Nice work. I have also tested fructose activities on Ubuntu 20.04 with
sucrose package version 0.117 , Some of the errors you mentioned are
reproducible in following activities in Browse, Calculate and in write. I
would suggest opening issues in GitHub repositories so that if someone
Hello all,
This took quite a while, long post ahead. Testing the Fructose activities:
| Sugar | Debian |
| 0.117-3 | Buster / 10.4, (unstable packages) |
Tick ✓ Cross ✕
| Activity | Start/Stop | Functions | Save/Restore | Collaboration | Interface
| Other |
| Browse | ✕ Debian #963068 | ✓
Thanks.
Successful tests are also useful because (a) it helps others see how to test,
(b) it helps others see what has been tested. It is difficult to know how much
testing is done based only on problem reports.
Please do continue to report the problems briefly, regardless of if they are
Yes, the testing of Sugar 117-3 on Debian 10.4 Buster/Stable was done to
establish a baseline. This should help in determining if issues are due to
Sugar or Debian while testing on Debian 'testing' and 'unstable'. I will
include the successful tests next time, might take a little longer.
I'll
Thanks.
I'm taking no action here, I'll use the GitHub issues once I get to them later
today.
I note your project updates almost entirely deal with test faiures. Could you
please also include a separate section which lists the successful testing and
how it was performed? This is likely to
Hello all,
Project update; almost done with testing the fructose set of activities in
Sugar 117-3 on Debian 10.4, issues found so far:
Debian Related:
- glib-compile-schemas not found. Due to missing libglib2.0-bin package
Sugar Related:
-
Write Activity -> Default font is
Hello Shaan,
You are not reporting a bug "from Sugar". You are reporting a bug in Debian.
You know it is in Debian because the upstream release of the software works
fine without Debian changing it, and you have seen that Debian has changed it.
reportbug is best, as it will ask you what
Hello James,
Regarding reporting the bug to Debian, should reporting via the reportbug
package be suitable or would it be better to mail it instead? I was following
https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting which suggested using the package. I am
not posting in their mailing list but since it is
This is not a complete response.
1. the debian/patches are applied during package building (dpkg-build) and not
during package installation; though I agree you could explain it as the
installation phase of the building, it is confusing,
2. a Debian policy or convention requires that GSchema
Regarding the error: glib-compile-schemas: not found,
Here’s how it was working while libglib2.0-bin was a dependency/commit
c5717fc3:
- Creates gschemas.compiled in
~/.sugar/default/org.laptop.WebActivity/data/schemas/ directory (if missing).
- Creates
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 1:39 PM shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in <
shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in> wrote:
> Hello Ibiam,
>
> I am not sure if I got this right regarding the difference in line numbers
> but patch 1001
>
Hello Ibiam,
I am not sure if I got this right regarding the difference in line numbers but
patch 1001 changes the schema indentation as discussed earlier. This patch has
been numbered 1001, according to the README in the same commit, “1xxx: Possibly
relevant for upstream adoption”. It has
Shaan,
* the sources are different, and this is not unusual, and not a problem worth
reporting unless an explanation cannot be found,
* the commits in salsa explain the reason for every difference.
Now that you have detected a difference, please make sure you read the commits,
in all aspects;
Thanks for the update.
Both files in the Debian salsa repo and the github repo have matching lines
and I'm also guessing the file at
the installed /usr/share/activities/browseactivity will also have matching
- can you confirm if it does? - lines
but the traceback prints the wrong lines.
--
Hello Ibiam,
Comparing browse.py in:
- Github repository https://github.com/sugarlabs/browse-activity/
- Debian Salsa repository
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-sugar-team/sugar-browse-activity/-/blob/master/browser.py
- The installed activity at /usr/share/activities/browseactivity
You might have to include it as a dependency for your next release as
that's the latest version
that Browse currently has, what doesn't sit well with me is the line
difference, I can't do any
investigation at the moment but it'll be great if you took a look at the
source code to confirm the line
Hello Ibiam,The version of the browse-activity installed was 205-2.
Sorry for the late reply, temporarily away from home, I'm on a different system
testing Sugar and internet bandwidth isn't very high. Should be back in a day
or two.
Best,
Shaan
On Sunday, 7 June, 2020, 3:50:23 am IST,
Thanks Shaan, what version of Browse are you running as the lines in the
traceback are off
from the latest version?
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 6:58 PM shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in <
shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in> wrote:
> Hello Ibiam,
>
Hello Ibiam,Installing the libglib2.0-dev package fixes the issue. I have also
just found that this issue is mentioned in the browse-activity readme ''
Unusually, Browse also depends on glib-compile-schemas tocompile a Gio.Settings
schema. ''.
Online searches also return similar results, eg.
Can you test to confirm if it's the problem?
--
Ibiam Chihurumnaya
ibiamchihurumn...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 9:11 AM Shaan Subbaiah B C <
shaansubbaiah.c...@bmsce.ac.in> wrote:
> Hello Ibiam,
> Great to know that the markdown formatted as html is more convenient.
>
> I'm not
Hello Ibiam,
Great to know that the markdown formatted as html is more convenient.
I'm not entirely sure that the web activity issue is due to libglib2.0-dev
no being present as a depenency but the error seems to be caused due to
some header file missing that is fixed by installing that package.
Thanks for the update Shaan,
The error you shared in 2) happens in #840 like you said but the traceback
in the logs is seen for the first time
and looks like it's a Python 3 port regression, kindly open an issue in
sugar so it can be tracked.
Can you confirm that 3) is caused by libglib2.0-dev
I have tried to install sucrose on the standard Debian Live ISO (it has no
Desktop Environment, only CLI) as there were some issues while trying to do so
in the Debian Live (KDE Plasma) ISO:
-
Attempting to install sucrose v117-x after adding the unstable repositories to
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 08:00:12PM +0300, Srevin Saju wrote:
> Regarding this, what about using `github.io` and providing a blog
> link to the mailing list, [...]
My preference is not.
When people have to follow links, or attachments, readers are diminished.
It is best to give an update in text
Thanks Shaan.
That's a good test outcome.
Try changing default release to unstable in order to simplify the install step.
Avoid or reduce the testing 117-3 if you can assess the change as not requiring
a complete test. Look at the commits to the Debian package repository to make
that
Great feat.
> Aside, this message is pretty long and I'm assuming future mails will be
too. I have found browser extensions that will render markdown as HTML for
mail but it might look broken in the Sugar-Devel archive. Shall I send
these mails as plaintext next time or is there some other
Hello all,
I have successfully got Sugar v117-2 working on Debian 10 Buster (Stable).
Documented the steps I have followed if anyone is interested:
Install Debian 10 Buster on a VM
I used `debian-live-10.4.0-amd64-kde.iso` from
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current-live/amd64/bt-hybrid/
Hello Jui,
Thanks for asking.
The kind of work is using languages Python, Bash, and GNU Make, along
with tools such as apt, dpkg, git-buildpackage, and online services
provided by Debian Project. The work may involve any step of a
software development lifecycle; design, coding, and testing.
Hello,
I have previously contributed to sugarlabs and also have the required
prerequisites for the project ideas-
Maintain 25 Activities
Port to python 3
Debian Advocacy for sugar. I would share my draft proposals shortly.
This is regarding the third project idea, Debian Advocacy for sugar,
On
48 matches
Mail list logo
