User interface development mailing list for OLPC. ()

Daniel Narvaez | 19 May 2013 21:42

Getting karma to work with sugar-activity-html

Hello,

I think the easiest approach is probably to

1 Install an empty html activity, say sugar-html-test module, bundle_id org.sugarlabs.HTMLTestActivity.

2 Make sugar-activity-html support the --uri option. This is what I have right now

-        self._web_view.load_uri("activity://%s/index.html" % self._bundle_id)
+        if handle.uri:
+            self._web_view.load_uri(handle.uri)
+        else:
+            self._web_view.load_uri("activity://%s/index.html" %
+                                    self._bundle_id)

3 Fix sugar-launch to handle the --uri argument

4 Somehow fix sugar-launch to work properly with html activities. The websocket communication is not working right because it requires the key/port variables which are in the shell environment and sugar-launch is not running in there.

5 Run with something like

sugar-runner --test-command "sugar-launch org.sugarlabs.HTMLTestActivity --uri $url_to_karma_server"

Probably wrapped in a friendlier script.

I put together something like this in a very hacky way and it seems to launch sugar-html-graphics test fine.

I haven't tried to do 4 though. I'm not sure how to do it best. We could proxy the variables using org.laptop.Shell but I'm not too happy about how sugar-launch is done in general... supporting two pretty different application launch code paths complicate things. I wonder if it wouldn't be better to go through the shell also for sugar-launch. We can get the pid back and attach gdb.

--
Daniel Narvaez

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Aneesh Dogra | 19 May 2013 16:28

Remove sugar-html-core from guthub

As the sugar-html-core is now splited into sugar-html-activity and sugar-html-bus, its no point keeping it after the split.
--
Thanks
Aneesh Dogra (lionaneesh)

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Daniel Narvaez | 19 May 2013 13:41

[sugar-build] Is webkitgtk becoming a barrier?

Hey,

It seems like building webkitgtk is a bit of a pain for many people. I would like people feedback on how bad of an obstacle it really is and about a couple of possible solutions:

1 Have buildbot generate snapshots of the base system dependencies which most people are unlikely to want to modify anyway and upload those. It would probably be a system.img file which you would put in your sugar-build directory. With that file present, the external sugar dependencies would not be downloaded and built at all.

2 Officially support Fedora 19, disable the webkitgtk build there and suggest people for which building webkigtk is too much to use Fedora19.

Thoughts? Would you use 1/2 if it was available?

--
Daniel Narvaez

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Daniel Narvaez | 19 May 2013 12:36

Question when creating an html activity from template

>No AMD/CommonJS dependencies detected for: lib/sugar-html-graphics>/karma.conf.js
>List any dependencies, comma separated, no spaces:
>What global to use for exported value []:

It's sort of annoying/confusing. I guess we need to make volo ignore the karma files somehow.

--
Daniel Narvaez

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Aneesh Dogra | 19 May 2013 09:16

[sugar-build] Issues while building libsoup

Hello List,

I am facing some problems building libsoup. I am running fedora 18 with git head version of sugar-build. Has someone else faced this problem before?

I notice that sugar-build pulls the latest version of glib and builds it, so this problem seems to be caused with some other issue. I have no clue how to fix this! Thanks in advance for any help.

Log:

* Building libsoup

Command failed, tail of /home/aneesh-sugardev/sugar-build/logs/build-141.log

checking if libtool supports shared libraries... yes
checking whether to build shared libraries... yes
checking whether to build static libraries... yes
checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config
checking pkg-config is at least version 0.16... yes
checking for GLIB - version >= 2.36.0... no
*** Could not run GLIB test program, checking why...
*** The test program failed to compile or link. See the file config.log for the
*** exact error that occured. This usually means GLIB is incorrectly installed.
configure: error: GLIB 2.36.0 or later is required to build libsoup

--
Thanks
Aneesh Dogra (lionaneesh)

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Aneesh Dogra | 19 May 2013 04:10

Could someone please add me to the Sugarlabs organization on github.

Hey,

That way I can transfer the newly created sugar-html-bus [1] and sugar-html-activity [2] to the organization's repo.

[1]: https://github.com/lionaneesh/sugar-html-bus

[2]: https://github.com/lionaneesh/sugar-html-activity

--

Thanks
Aneesh Dogra (lionaneesh)

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Aneesh Dogra | 19 May 2013 03:50

[sugar-build] Regarding the patch e814c36

I don't really get what the patch [1] is intended to do? I mean I see it deleting all the json files which specifies the packages to download.

I am sorry if I am missing something important, but the commit message isn't enough to explain what its trying to do.

[1]: https://github.com/lionaneesh/sugar-build/commit/e814c3639413216c683325f9817d5c485a8ad0e1
--
Thanks
Aneesh Dogra (lionaneesh)

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Gary Kline | 19 May 2013 03:40

voice-by-computer?


	hello,

	would OLPC be interested in my open-source GTK+ program that 
	uses the laptop to speech what has been typed in by keyboard?

	My program uses gtk-3.x and the C language.  it  requires 
	espeak and vim/gvim.  other than that my program helps anyone who
	is speech-impaired and who can type to communicate.  

	I have been multiply  disabled since childhood by a rare disorder.
	Nonetheless, I graduated from Cal, Berkeley with my EECS and 
	have earned a living as a computer engineer since the early
	1980s.  

	gary kline

--

-- 
 Gary Kline  kline <at> thought.org  http://www.thought.org  Public Service Unix
              Twenty-six years of service to the Unix community.

headers

Daniel Narvaez | 19 May 2013 00:48

[PATCH sugar-terminal] Use json instead of simplejson

--
Daniel Narvaez

Attachment (0001-Use-json-instead-of-simplejson.patch): application/octet-stream, 1125 bytes

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Daniel Narvaez | 18 May 2013 21:53

HTML activities TODO

Hi,

It was mentioned in some other thread, but posting to make sure everyone has seen it :)

We have a good start of a TODO list for html activities. If you want to get involved this is your chance!

https://github.com/sugarlabs/roadmap/issues/8

--
Daniel Narvaez

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

headers

Daniel Narvaez | 18 May 2013 18:21

Re: Requiring test coverage for new code

On 17 May 2013 15:13, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez <at> gmail.com> wrote:

Simon, Manuel,

any feedback about this? I see a few possible levels

1 Everything, bugfixes included

2 Every feature patch

3 Every patch to the new html/javascript code

4 Nothing, leave it to the contributor willingness

Summarizing the positions expressed in the thread

Simon would like 1.

Marco would do 2 and then consider if we can move to 1.

Manuel would like 2.

Walter would be happy with 2, as long as there is guidance.

Gonzalo and James doesn't seem happy about requiring tests at all.

I suppose Simon and Manuel needs to talk and make a decision. These are the times when it's nice to have maintainers and not be one :P

_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel <at> lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun

		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

358	May 2013
459	April 2013
363	March 2013
293	February 2013
286	January 2013
336	December 2012
462	November 2012
567	October 2012
585	September 2012
682	August 2012
365	July 2012
604	June 2012
674	May 2012
639	April 2012
601	March 2012
292	February 2012
483	January 2012
456	December 2011
500	November 2011
460	October 2011
497	September 2011
614	August 2011
385	July 2011
523	June 2011
570	May 2011
350	April 2011
467	March 2011
450	February 2011
371	January 2011
338	December 2010
579	November 2010
1086	October 2010
926	September 2010
630	August 2010
624	July 2010
825	June 2010
624	May 2010
428	April 2010
442	March 2010
469	February 2010
600	January 2010
546	December 2009
627	November 2009
556	October 2009
1135	September 2009
1307	August 2009
1441	July 2009
1225	June 2009
628	May 2009
700	April 2009
1075	March 2009
324	February 2009
181	January 2009
177	December 2008
515	November 2008
872	October 2008
780	September 2008
496	August 2008
818	July 2008
530	June 2008
775	May 2008
676	April 2008
397	March 2008
186	February 2008
105	January 2008
226	December 2007
190	November 2007
255	October 2007
184	September 2007
295	August 2007
218	July 2007
155	June 2007
251	May 2007
277	April 2007
504	March 2007
369	February 2007
161	January 2007
153	December 2006
137	November 2006
239	October 2006
240	September 2006
144	August 2006
58	July 2006