Re: [Sugar-devel] Feature freeze
We are not approaching 0.101.4 and the feature freeze, three days left. There are three pull requests that I feel the freeze would apply to https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/192 https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/pull/88 (These are probably in manuq court). https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/pull/124 Is there anything else outside the review queue? On 13 March 2014 13:26, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.comwrote: On 13 March 2014 08:50, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Daniel would you be amicable to stretching it out by a month so we have one more round of dev releases before entering freeze? Sorry for the delay on closing down this issue, I have been busy. I'll try to keep it short so that we can all go back at work asap. I think we are taking the wrong decision in the wrong way here. I have yet to see a rationale for proposing a delay. We are apparently trying to save some time for some deployment team, and I'd argue we are not even saving much. I don't like this kind of ad hoc decisions, as an upstream we should be thinking less about our own short time priorities and more about potential contributors. I'm not in love with time based releases, as I have pointed out in the past, but we should be reconsidering our release approach as a whole, if it's not good enough, rather than making an exception for not particularly good reasons. I see your point, but I think is better separate the issue of extend these release cycle, to start a discussion about how we will manage the release cycle in the future. Maybe we should define a time, after 0.102, to review our release strategy. That said, I think the community consensus is pretty clear, I'm the only one in disagreement. So please someone send me the new release dates and I'll update the schedule. After ask manuq, and reading other comments here, I propose: 0.101.4 - 04/01/14 - Feature Freeze 0.101.5 - 05/01/14 - String, UI, API freeze 0.102.0 - 06/01/14 - Final release Now, back to work! We need do good use of this time! -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Learning Software for children -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Feature freeze
I have been trying to fix a problem with https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/316 (which fixes SL #800) If I disable interaction with GNOME, it seems to work, but somehow it gets confused when sending/receiving notifications between Sugar and GNOME. Hope to track it down over the weekend. -walter On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: We are not approaching 0.101.4 and the feature freeze, three days left. There are three pull requests that I feel the freeze would apply to https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/192 https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/pull/88 (These are probably in manuq court). https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/pull/124 Is there anything else outside the review queue? On 13 March 2014 13:26, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 March 2014 08:50, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Daniel would you be amicable to stretching it out by a month so we have one more round of dev releases before entering freeze? Sorry for the delay on closing down this issue, I have been busy. I'll try to keep it short so that we can all go back at work asap. I think we are taking the wrong decision in the wrong way here. I have yet to see a rationale for proposing a delay. We are apparently trying to save some time for some deployment team, and I'd argue we are not even saving much. I don't like this kind of ad hoc decisions, as an upstream we should be thinking less about our own short time priorities and more about potential contributors. I'm not in love with time based releases, as I have pointed out in the past, but we should be reconsidering our release approach as a whole, if it's not good enough, rather than making an exception for not particularly good reasons. I see your point, but I think is better separate the issue of extend these release cycle, to start a discussion about how we will manage the release cycle in the future. Maybe we should define a time, after 0.102, to review our release strategy. That said, I think the community consensus is pretty clear, I'm the only one in disagreement. So please someone send me the new release dates and I'll update the schedule. After ask manuq, and reading other comments here, I propose: 0.101.4 - 04/01/14 - Feature Freeze 0.101.5 - 05/01/14 - String, UI, API freeze 0.102.0 - 06/01/14 - Final release Now, back to work! We need do good use of this time! -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Learning Software for children -- Daniel Narvaez ___ 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
[Sugar-devel] Pep8 1.5.1
Hello, I just updated sugar-build to use pep8 1.5.1. Please osbuild pull asap if you are submitting patches, to avoid osbuild check errors when the code will be merged. -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] shipped languages/locales
dnarvaez, Any idea about what should we do with this? Gonzalo On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.orgwrote: Yes, but is not a problem in the rpm, but in the sources repository. Gonzalo On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Jerry Vonau m...@jvonau.ca wrote: The hint was given in the initial email, alter ALL_LINGUAS= in /configure.ac Jerry On March 26, 2014 at 1:27 PM Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Maybe the reason is we don't have en_GB in the variable ALL_LINGUAS in the Makefile.in in sugar/po directory. In my system: * we have a file en_GB.po sugar-build/sugar/po/ * the file is not copied in sugar-build/build/out/install/share/locale/en_GB/LC_MESSAGES not sure how Makefile.in is created, here Makefile.in.in is a link to /usr/share/intltool/Makefile.in.in Gonzalo On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Jerry Vonau m...@jvonau.ca wrote: I know there is no translations for en_AU in Pootle therefore not in sugar, but en_GB was used in the past as a substitute for this shortcoming. There are languages in Pootle that form the source tar file that becomes part of the source rpm, however the resulting installable rpm doesn't ship all the languages available from the source rpm. This thread started with the question should all the available translations from Pootle be shipped in the rpm, and that question still stands. Jerry On March 26, 2014 at 11:53 AM Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com wrote: We do not have an en_AU language project in Pootle, so that does not surprise me. On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Jerry Vonau m...@jvonau.ca wrote: That is strange, I don't see en_AU's translation file when extracting the files from the released rpm[1]. The src[2] rpm's tar file only lists en_GB and en_USA, but those are not in the released rpm and not en_AU at all. Jerry 1. http://harvest.one-education.org/public/au1b-updates/RPMS/sugar-0.100.1-10.olpcau.noarch.rpm 2. http://harvest.one-education.org/public/au1b-updates/SRPMS/sugar-0.100.1-10.olpcau.src.rpm On March 26, 2014 at 9:07 AM Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: We included en_AU, but not en_GB. Will be in the next image. Gonzalo On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Chris Leonard cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.comwrote: I believe AU makes their own build with en_GB. cjl On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jerry Vonau m...@jvonau.ca wrote: Just wondering how AU is reacting without having the correct spelling for 'favourites', 'neighbourhood' that comes with en_BR. This is a regression from DX4 that included such support. It would be better would really support en_AU thou. just my thoughts, Jerry On March 26, 2014 at 6:59 AM Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote: I think was done to preserve space. Not sure if that is a concern now. Gonzalo On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 8:43 PM, me m...@jvonau.ca wrote: Hi All: I'm wondering if there is any reason why there are po files generated for the source in git, these are included as .mo files in the src rpm, but not shipped in the released rpms. Compare the list in git[1] and what becomes installed in the resulting rpm through ALL_LINGUAS=[2]. Is there any reason for this? Would it be worthwhile to ship all available translations? Jerry 1. https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/tree/master/po 2. https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/blob/master/configure.ac ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Learning Software for children ___ 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 -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Learning Software for children ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
