-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Sugar developers!
Whoops - my initial email was intended for the Debian-specific mailinglist, but accidentally ended at its.an.edu. Sorry about the noise. I notice that Morgan cross-posted his response to the sugar list as well - - this email is cross-posted too, please tell me if one or more lists should be left out from further discussion. On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:01:27PM +0200, Morgan Collett wrote: >On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> All core Sugar packages are now in Debian Testing! >> >> With "core" I mean all Sugar software except activities themselves. >> >> (upstream have no clear definition of "core" - it seems they agree >> that Sugar should always include some activities, but does not agree >> on some common default "core" set of activities...) > >You must have missed the recent activity on the sugar list... Sugar as >an upstream project now has designated "demo" activities which distros >can choose to bundle. I knew about the sugarlabs.org wiki, but was unaware that such bundling was already decided officially now. >http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy gives names to different >components in the stack which as been known in whole or part as >"Sugar". Fructose now refers to the activities bundled with Sugar. That page looks like just a proposal to me. If official, I recommend rephrasing the initial section of that page (and/or point me to some other more official page). >> We need more activities packaged! Please speak up if you are >> interested in helping out. > >I haven't done packaging before - it's always been on my TODO list to >learn. Great! Please subscribe to the Debian-specific mailinglist at http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-olpc-devel and let's discuss the details there :-) >Please remind me where your documentation is, and what list to join. Specifics about Sugar packaging is (mostly missing currently, but intended to end up) at http://wiki.debian.org/Sugar >I think we should have a page on the sugarlabs wiki tracking each >distro's packaging. Something like this: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Sugar_on_Debian ? >I helped test Jani's Ubuntu packages before the hardy release. >Unfortunately I only realised days before the release that the sugar >versions included were not the most appropriate versions: taken from a >different branch to the stable release. While it looks the same as the >stable release (0.75.x in build 703) there are differences, which may >mean bugs in the Ubuntu version (0.79.0) which were fixed in the 0.75.x >series after that release. So I really want to see distro releases >(especially Ubuntu) having the most appropriate versions of the Sugar >stack. ...and the (quite recent!) links you provided is valuable for us distributors to understand what you mean by "appropriate". :-) Thanks. - Jonas - -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIOFhon7DbMsAkQLgRAjenAJ99DeSD4X/QqWc/KORFP/f0l1D5aQCfZCn6 GQvhnNt1W7+mh7XMLAZwcDk= =y0kb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
