[SoaS] Etoys in Sugar was: SoaS v10 testing and a few minor issues with 0.100

[Bert Freudenberg]

On 19.11.2013, at 17:33, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:

>>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Gonzalo Odiard <gonzalo at laptop.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - The "eToys" activity (version 116) does not start properly
>>>>>>  then displays
>>>>>>  « cannot find image file: squeak, did you run 'inisqueak-m' ? »
>>> 
>>> This was ticketed here,
>>> https://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/4415
>> 
>> Ah. I even commented on that, apparently :)
>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The eToys developers are basically unresponsive, I'm in two minds
>>>>> whether we even bother to ship it because they can't be bothered doing
>>>>> things like updating to the latest sugar by migrating away from
>>>>> sugar-presence-service/ which was deprecated a long time ago.
>> 
>> This is a rather non-trivial change to Etoys, whereas keeping the sugar-presence-service emulation around is pretty trivial.
>> 
>> Yes it would be good to do it, no I have not had the time. Nor someone else.
> 
> You've had 3 odd years.

Yes. It never got to the top of my priority list. Mea culpa.

>> But made Etoys work even if the emulated presence service is not around. So everything except collaborating should work fine.
> 
> How? what release, how was it communicated?

Etoys 5. We last talked about it on the SoaS list on June 7 2012. I wrote in reply to Manuel Kaufmann:

"With regard to sharing, the only difference between Etoys 4 and Etoys 5 is that 
Etoys 5 will still work if the presence service fails, whereas Etoys 4 showed 
an error on startup."

>>>> But this looks like a different problem, right?
>> 
>> Yes.
> 
> Care to elaborate?

The startup error "cannot find image file: squeak" is not related to the presence service at all, because it happens before Etoys is even started up. So, "yes, this looks like a different problem". But without further information I can not elaborate, unfortunately.

- Bert -