[IAEP] Sugar packaging in Squeeze, Karmic
David Van Assche
dvanassche at gmail.com
Wed Aug 12 15:04:53 EDT 2009
For Guadalinex-edu, we are taking jhconvert packages as a base, under
Karmic. These are the most up to date and probably most tested packages
currently available for Ubuntu (courtesy of Aleksey) It would make sense to
bundle these with edubuntu too, at least until the debian packages are
completely up to date.
David Van Assche
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 04:58:42PM +0200, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>> Sorry for not including this list in the Cc list right away.
>> I was unaware of its existence.
> No problem.
> Even if not that loud on the radar, the OLPC team at Alioth has been the
> main point of Debian-base Sugar packaging coordination since long before I
> became active, however, so I feel it makes great sense to keep in the loop
> Up to date .deb packages of Sugar 0.84.6 appear to be available in both
>> Sid and Squeeze, courtesy of Jonas:
>> (see at the botton for a full list of packages in Debian)
> Please beware that sugar-0.84 only reflect that single piece of the larger
> puzzle: Still not all of Sucrose is packaged officially for Debian.
> Karmic has already picked these up:
> Great to see that Debian packages are usable for others too!
> 1) Is anyone routinely testing Sugar in Debian?
> Not that I know of. If anyone does this is most welcome to post their
> experiences, good or bad, to the Debian OLPC mailinglist:
> debian-olpc-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> Also less systematic (i.e. not exactly "routinely") testing is valuable to
> get feedback on.
> 3) Who is tracking the current status, setting a roadmap
>> and handling bug reports?
> The Debian BTS is used to track bugs against the packages maintained by the
> Alioth OLPC team - a list of all open bugs are here:
> Since I am the only one contributing so far (which is arguably tied to my
> choice of packaging style), the "roadmap" is whatever I like it to be.
> Others are most welcome to try convince me to steer in a particular
> direction, and even more welcome to contribute in getting there. :-)
> Current status is best viewed here:
> What cannot be seen from above overview is that recent packaging of several
> branches of upstream code (so far only sugar-toolkit-0.84 and
> sugar-toolkit-0.86) is not done independently but using multiple branches of
> same Git, tracking each commits from each related upstream branches.
> Downstream distributors need not care about this, but those wanting to
> contribute may benefit from being able to track both upstream and packaging
> changes this fine-grained.
> 4) Would someone be interested in pushing this work downstream
>> to Skolelinux and FUSS?
> The full list of Sugar related packages in Debian is quite impressive:
> Above will be dropped: 0.82 code conflicing with versioned packages
> Ignore above ones: they are just virtual packages
> Yes, above (and a few more) are all officially in Debian, and are all
> maintained by the Alioth OLPC team - but not all of them are up-to-date.
> Above are not in Debian. How did you compile your list?
> Let me repeat: Most accurate view on the packaging efforts done by the OLPC
> Alioth team is from here:
> Kind regards, and thanks for your interest in our FLOSS contributions,
> - Jonas
> * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
> * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
> [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
- "I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IAEP