Re: [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Drake <dsd <at> laptop.org> wrote:
> 2009/11/30 Walter Bender <walter.bender <at> gmail.com>:
>> This isn't quite accurate. We've been adding some pre-loaded content
>> to the Journal for quite some time now,
>
> Are you sure? Or are you referring to a manual process that you do in
> certain deployments?
>
> I have yet to see a sugar installation that comes with a non-empty
> journal. And also I can't think of any non-horrible way that you'd be
> able to hook into the sugar profile creation stages to pre-provide the
> content, even if I did like the idea.

Many deployments are doing this in some fashion or another. It is
currently an ugly kludge. This proposal will presumable make it less
ugly and less kludgy, but it is undoubtedly useful.

>> and some activities (as you
>> noted, Turtle Art) have been adding content to the Journal as well.
>
> This is the only one I'm aware of, and it was a big surprise, to the
> extent that I filed bugs upstream and downstream that were confirmed
> by other people who also didn't realise this. I also got the
> impression from you that you don't feel like it is the appropriate
> place to put it, you just did it because it is the only option.

On the contrary. I don't like it because it is clumsy to implement and
manage. Again, this proposal will address that. What I don't like is
having to keep my examples in the file system and use a file browser
to retrieve them. It turns out that because they are kept separately,

[RELEASE] Etoys 4.0.2339

This is a bug fix release for the XO 1.5. Also suited for SoaS (if it's not too late for that).

== Sources ==

http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/etoys/etoys-4.0.2339.tar.gz

http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/fructose/Etoys/Etoys-113.tar.gz

== Packaged for OLPC XO ==

http://etoys.laptop.org/rpms/etoys-4.0.2339-1.noarch.rpm

http://etoys.laptop.org/rpms/Etoys-113.xo

== Changes since 4.0.2337 ==

4.0.2339 (30 Nov 2009)

* fix view-source (SQ-600, OLPC-9733)
* fix etoys-based activities (SQ-604, SL-1576)

- Bert (for the Etoys team) -

Re: Sugar Platform clarifications

On 29.11.2009, at 15:02, Sascha Silbe wrote:
> 
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.86/Platform_Components

Speaking of Etoys - that 0.86 page lists 4.0.2206, whereas the actual Etoys version in the 0.86 release was
4.0.2319 (and 4.0.2332 in 0.86.2). How come? Should I just change it, and if so, to which version? Also,
there have been some bug fixes since then, the current version (good for 0.82 to 0.86) is 4.0.2339.

- Bert -

Re: Sugar Platform clarifications

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 02:15:46AM +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>On 29.11.2009, at 15:02, Sascha Silbe wrote:
>>
>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.86/Platform_Components
>
>Speaking of Etoys - that 0.86 page lists 4.0.2206, whereas the actual 
>Etoys version in the 0.86 release was 4.0.2319 (and 4.0.2332 in 
>0.86.2). How come? Should I just change it, and if so, to which 
>version? Also, there have been some bug fixes since then, the current 
>version (good for 0.82 to 0.86) is 4.0.2339.

I believe that page should have the minimal version working with Sugar.

It is a wiki: feel free to update if the information is wrong 

  - Jonas

--

-- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

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

Re: [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 07:18:47PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Drake <dsd <at> laptop.org> wrote:
> > 2009/11/30 Walter Bender <walter.bender <at> gmail.com>:
> >> This isn't quite accurate. We've been adding some pre-loaded content
> >> to the Journal for quite some time now,
> >
> > Are you sure? Or are you referring to a manual process that you do in
> > certain deployments?
> >
> > I have yet to see a sugar installation that comes with a non-empty
> > journal. And also I can't think of any non-horrible way that you'd be
> > able to hook into the sugar profile creation stages to pre-provide the
> > content, even if I did like the idea.
> 
> Many deployments are doing this in some fashion or another. It is
> currently an ugly kludge. This proposal will presumable make it less
> ugly and less kludgy, but it is undoubtedly useful.
> 
> >> and some activities (as you
> >> noted, Turtle Art) have been adding content to the Journal as well.
> >
> > This is the only one I'm aware of, and it was a big surprise, to the
> > extent that I filed bugs upstream and downstream that were confirmed
> > by other people who also didn't realise this. I also got the
> > impression from you that you don't feel like it is the appropriate
> > place to put it, you just did it because it is the only option.
> 
> On the contrary. I don't like it because it is clumsy to implement and
> manage. Again, this proposal will address that. What I don't like is
> having to keep my examples in the file system and use a file browser

please test aslo-web.sugarlabs.org

This evening we brought up aslo-web.sugarlabs.org .  It is a exact replica of activities.sugarlabs.org. 
Within the next couple of day we will be load balancing between them.

In the meantime... please test to help us make sure it is set up correctly before it goes into production.

david

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

OLPC updates from ASLO

Hi all,

AFAIK OLPC will use 0.84 release and will lack of native sugar updater
but it could be useful idea to keep activities repository in one place.

So, the question is will html page which lists all ASLO activities in
microformat enough for OLPC updater.

--

-- 
Aleksey

[RELEASE] sugar-toolkit-0.87.1

== Source ==

http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit/sugar-toolkit-0.87.1.tar.bz2

== News ==
- updated translations

Re: OLPC updates from ASLO

2009/12/1 Aleksey Lim <alsroot <at> member.fsf.org>:
> AFAIK OLPC will use 0.84 release and will lack of native sugar updater
> but it could be useful idea to keep activities repository in one place.

We are using the sugar control panel applet for activity updates as we
have done before.

> So, the question is will html page which lists all ASLO activities in
> microformat enough for OLPC updater.

Having the microformat on ASLO would be great and I never understood
why this wasn't the approach taken in the first place, rather than the
considerable task of adding some strange XML format support to the
updater applet for later versions.

The great thing about the microformat is that not only did it provide
an interface for those of us single-users who have fast internet
connections, it was designed inherently for simplicity, scalability
and replication, and came with a decent amount of documentation of how
you would replicate this on a deployment. The XML thing seems to be
lacking in those areas.

However I think there are 2 additional things that would block moving
the activity group to ASLO:
 1. It's not possible to create a group with specific locked versions,
right? One reason for doing it separately is that we want to control
the flow of activity updates pushed to customers. I'm concerned that
activities are not seeing much QA or testing and regressions are too
easy to come by. I'm also concerned that the amount of testing that
developers do on 0.84 before marking activities as 0.84-compatible

[RELEASE] sugar-base-0.87.1

== Source ==
http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-base/sugar-base-0.87.1.tar.bz2

== News ==
version bump