[ASLO] [REQUEST] Etoys-113

[Bert Freudenberg]

On 01.12.2009, at 21:05, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 08:54:26PM +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>> On 01.12.2009, at 20:42, Aleksey Lim wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 12:34:35PM -0600, dfarning at sugarlabs.org wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>>>>> On 01.12.2009, at 18:52, Sugar Labs Activities wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A Sugar Labs Activities Editor requested further information from you regarding version 113 of your activity Etoys.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Aleksey Lim wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "This activity works with 0.82 as well but previous version was only 0.84.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I can't remember releasing the previous version for 0.84 only.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And wouldn't marking the new bundle as only for 0.86 give the impression it does not work in earlier releases?
>>>>> 
>>>>> OTOH since it is pre-installed anyway it doesn't really matter. If you think marking it for 0.86 only is better, feel free to do so.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> And since its only startup wrapper maybe it makes sense to keep this activity per sugar release(to not confuse users when they see etoys "last" version in Home view)?"
>>>>> 
>>>>> Well I'm confused. Doesn't the updater respect the bundle's update_url? What does the updater have to do with a.sl.o?
>>>> 
>>>> As of .86 sugar ships with a aslo-updater.  The updater pings a.sl.o to see if any new versions of installed activities exist.
>>> 
>>> at the end it depends on what the right version of etoys+etoys-activity
>>> (keeping in mind that sugar user can see only etoys-activity version)
>>> e.g. 0.82 user can install(since v133 was marked 0.82-0.86) v133 and
>>> will see Etoys-133 in Home view but etoys will be the same(from
>>> sucrose-0.82).
>> 
>> Except neither 0.82 nor 0.84 pay attention to a.sl.o. Only 0.86 does - that's when the new updater was introduced, right?
> 
> but user can install activity manually from ASLO

And ASLO hides versions based on the browser's user-agent? Is this documented anywhere?

We should move this conversation to sugar-devel ...

- Bert -