On Jul 14, 2016 12:26 PM, "Tony Anderson" <<a href="mailto:tony_anderson@usa.net">tony_anderson@usa.net</a>> wrote: > > The problem is ASLO, our primary interface and support for our user community. > > If we are going the github route, we need to set up a means for updated versions of Activities to be made into bundles and installed on the ASLO repository. It seems to me that the ALSO repository is dangerous unmaintained code and has been on its last legs for a while and those legs just broke. We can put them in a cast, but they are not going to heal. We need a plan to move off this php5 codebase. I am proposing a simple static site that hosts xo bundles, that is functionally equivalent to the php5 codebase. > Presumably documentation (but no code) would be required to document a procedure to submit or update activities. Right. > In the case of ASLO, the code base is PhP. At one time, it was proposed to implement in Python using Django - following the lead of Mozilla. This apparently didn't happen. Jekyll is clearly a much better framework, it's website promises that installing Jekyll is sufficient to create a website. :) Is mozilla addons still a libre codebase? > The 'crumbling to dust' applies to the code not Python. Any software needs support. Most of the original developers of the Sugar activities have moved on to greener pastures. We have activities that failed because they incorporated object code which was not recompiled for ARM. We have activities that failed because they were build with hulahop. We have activities that failed because they imported Abiword. I have not seen a single example of a Sugar activity that had to be updated because of Python 2.7. Right :) Python 2.7 packages themselves will be dropped and all python 2 code needs porting to 3 well in advance of that. Eventually all i386 packages will be dropped too. We need to plan for these eventualities :)