Excerpts from Martin Langhoff's message of Tue Feb 15 14:57:01 +0100 2011:
Going back to your original post to note something important: these
statuses aren't important _just_ to show in the UI. This should be a
system status property that can be queried by activities and by
cronjobs / cli
There also is the possibility of a false positive if we check too
little. Some networks might like to act like everything is available
when that is not the case.
Captive portals such as those seemingly found at pretty much every
university and hotel I've gone to lately come to mind, and these
Excerpts from Anish Mangal's message of Mon Feb 14 22:20:23 +0100 2011:
Since this discussion has many different areas (Usage goals, Backend
implementation, UI implementation) should we move this to a wiki page?
This way, anyone replying to a specific point won't have to waste time
filtering
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Anish Mangal
an...@activitycentral.org wrote:
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test for
internet connectivity and maybe reflect that by displaying a small
globe
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:57, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Anish Mangal
an...@activitycentral.org wrote:
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 08:57:01AM -0500, Martin Langhoff wrote:
Going back to your original post to note something important: these
statuses aren't important _just_ to show in the UI. This should be a
system status property that can be queried by activities and by
cronjobs / cli utils.
I
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:37 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
NetworkManager already has sufficient functionality for reporting the
state of a network connection.
No it doesn't; if it did I'd use it :-)
If we know whether we can see the XS or the internet we can, for example
- run a
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Michael Stone mich...@laptop.org wrote:
So what network affordances [1, 2] are we supposed to make discoverable? :)
Let's not get too academic. Reading back the thread:
- can we reach the internet? (or it might be a controlled WAN)
- can we reach an XS?
In
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 at 10:12:40 -0500, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Michael Stone mich...@laptop.org wrote:
So what network affordances [1, 2] are we supposed to make discoverable? :)
Martin,
I don't want to hijack any threads this month,
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Michael Stone mich...@laptop.org wrote:
Let's not get too academic.
FYI, this remark stings rather more than I think you intended.
Apologies. It was short for too long and formal, let's communicate in
shorter messages, I don't need formal or logical proof of
[cc += peace-corps@sl-devel]
I think everyone agrees that 'more (than current)' information can be
conveyed to the user which might actually be of use...
Everyone has raised very valid points... Lets aim to address the
simple issues first, try them out in different (network setup)
environments
On 10 Feb 2011, at 15:46, Anish Mangal wrote:
Hi,
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test for
internet connectivity and maybe reflect that by displaying a small
globe overlaid on the 'Network' icon?
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Anish Mangal
an...@activitycentral.org wrote:
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test for
internet connectivity and maybe reflect that by displaying a small
globe
On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 at 12:46:18 -0300, Anish Mangal an...@activitycentral.org
wrote:
Hi,
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test for
internet connectivity and maybe reflect that by displaying a small
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Michael Stone mich...@laptop.org wrote:
The Sugar UI should make network health discoverable.
Good point in general. To what is trying to get solved, I'd word it as
Sugar UI should make network _affordances_ discoverable.
We can get a rough initial version with
For the schoolserver (and other jabber-based environments), wouldn't the
best check be to see if there is a working gabble connection and that we
are not on salut?
It seems like a lot of people are trying to guess how deployments like
to configure their networks (DNS, ICMP ping support to
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Samuel Greenfeld greenf...@laptop.org wrote:
For the schoolserver (and other jabber-based environments), wouldn't the
best check be to see if there is a working gabble connection and that we are
not on salut?
That only works _after_ you've registered. So no.
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 at 19:41:32 -0500, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Michael Stone mich...@laptop.org wrote:
The Sugar UI should make network health discoverable.
Good point in general.
(Thanks! :)
To what is trying to get solved, I'd
[Posting to sugar-devel only because it's not specific to dextrose]
Excerpts from Anish Mangal's message of Thu Feb 10 16:46:18 +0100 2011:
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test for
internet
Hi,
Currently, the 'network' icon on the frame tells us whether we're
connected to a network or not. Would it make sense for it to test for
internet connectivity and maybe reflect that by displaying a small
globe overlaid on the 'Network' icon?
--
Anish
It might indicate connectivity to either the school server, Jabber
server, or successful NTP synchronisation. A deployment might customise
what method to use, including hostnames of their own infrastructure.
The default should be harmless.
This feature is present on at least three modern
21 matches
Mail list logo
