On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 15:19 +0100, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gary C Martin wrote:
> > Other activities that support some form of collaboration like Chat, Browse,
> > Etoys, TurtleArt, Arithmetic, Maze, Pippy, etc, etc, don't care who started
> > the activity first, o
One area I'm a little unsure about is the network connectivity (ie, how
sugar presence interfaces with sugar presence service backend. Presumably it
just uses NM and launched telepathy's RequiredConnection dbus pythong
binding. What's interesting, reading over the developer's manual is that
there a
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 17:40, David Van Assche wrote:
> Hi,
> So I was looking over the code with some of the #telepathy guys who are
> also under the impression that sugar.presence code could be causing many of
> the collab problems. Main issue is redundancy of code... a lot of what is
> happe
Hi,
So I was looking over the code with some of the #telepathy guys who are
also under the impression that sugar.presence code could be causing many of
the collab problems. Main issue is redundancy of code... a lot of what is
happening in sugar.presence already happens in telepathy (actually the
Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 9:54 PM, David Van Assche wrote:
>> moving to mission control 5 and letting go of the admittedly
>> antiquated sugar presence now
...
> If you play with a major component replacement
>
> - test it for scalability & stability over wifi before doing
Don't get me wrong though, I agree thoroughly that we should really
test it and make sure it plays as advertised But I think its gonna
be easier to do that than test/scale/stabalise what we currently have.
David
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:06 AM, David Van Assche wrote:
> Well, at least on Gno
Well, at least on Gnome, Mission Control not only works well, but its
far more stable and does what its supposed to. Its been very heavily
tested by Nokia (Maemo), Collabra, Google, openmoko and other heavy
hitters. I don't really agree that we have something that works with
sugar presence. In the
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 9:54 PM, David Van Assche wrote:
> moving to mission control 5 and letting go of the admittedly
> antiquated sugar presence now
In planning future work in rpesence and collab stuff, I have a small,
humble suggestion.
Figuring out if a presence service / collab infra works
Hey,
I mentioned this to Walter on IRC the other day, but I'd very much
like to participate in anything telepathy based, especially, maybe
moving to mission control 5 and letting go of the admittedly
antiquated sugar presence now, I do need some guidance though, as I am
by no means a python gur
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 15:07, Benjamin M. Schwartz
wrote:
> Martin Langhoff wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gary C Martin wrote:
>>> Other activities that support some form of collaboration like Chat, Browse,
>>> Etoys, TurtleArt, Arithmetic, Maze, Pippy, etc, etc, don't care who starte
Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gary C Martin wrote:
>> Other activities that support some form of collaboration like Chat, Browse,
>> Etoys, TurtleArt, Arithmetic, Maze, Pippy, etc, etc, don't care who started
>> the activity first, or who goes away.
>
> Are you positive
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gary C Martin wrote:
> Other activities that support some form of collaboration like Chat, Browse,
> Etoys, TurtleArt, Arithmetic, Maze, Pippy, etc, etc, don't care who started
> the activity first, or who goes away.
Are you positive about this? I don't meant to tr
Hi Martin,
On 3 Nov 2009, at 13:18, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Walter Bender
> wrote:
>> We can set a new baseline for Sugar, but the behavior you are
>> describing is largely one determined by the activities themselves.
>
> I understood it was a limitation in Tel
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> We can set a new baseline for Sugar, but the behavior you are
> describing is largely one determined by the activities themselves.
I understood it was a limitation in Telepathy itself, or in how Sugar
uses it (hence the need to address it in
We can set a new baseline for Sugar, but the behavior you are
describing is largely one determined by the activities themselves.
This was the subject of Ben Schwartz's GSoC project. He made great
headway, but there remains the problem that most activities are not
utilizing his approach. Something e
We have had major issues for a while with any collaboration where the
leader (the node that created the collaboration instance) goes away.
In Sugar 0.82 all sorts of confusion ensues, with the exact symptoms
varying between the programs used.
Is this expected to be fixed in 0.84 or 0.86? In lookin
16 matches
Mail list logo
