[sugar] [IAEP] Core Sugar framework now in Debian Testing!

[Jonas Smedegaard]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Sugar developers!

Whoops - my initial email was intended for the Debian-specific 
mailinglist, but accidentally ended at its.an.edu.  Sorry about the 
noise.

I notice that Morgan cross-posted his response to the sugar list as well 
- - this email is cross-posted too, please tell me if one or more lists 
should be left out from further discussion.


On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 02:01:27PM +0200, Morgan Collett wrote:
>On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:

>> All core Sugar packages are now in Debian Testing!
>>
>> With "core" I mean all Sugar software except activities themselves.
>>
>> (upstream have no clear definition of "core" - it seems they agree 
>> that Sugar should always include some activities, but does not agree 
>> on some common default "core" set of activities...)
>
>You must have missed the recent activity on the sugar list... Sugar as 
>an upstream project now has designated "demo" activities which distros 
>can choose to bundle.

I knew about the sugarlabs.org wiki, but was unaware that such bundling 
was already decided officially now.


>http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy gives names to different 
>components in the stack which as been known in whole or part as 
>"Sugar". Fructose now refers to the activities bundled with Sugar.

That page looks like just a proposal to me.  If official, I recommend 
rephrasing the initial section of that page (and/or point me to some 
other more official page).


>> We need more activities packaged! Please speak up if you are 
>> interested in helping out.
>
>I haven't done packaging before - it's always been on my TODO list to 
>learn.

Great!  Please subscribe to the Debian-specific mailinglist at 
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-olpc-devel and 
let's discuss the details there :-)


>Please remind me where your documentation is, and what list to join.

Specifics about Sugar packaging is (mostly missing currently, but 
intended to end up) at http://wiki.debian.org/Sugar


>I think we should have a page on the sugarlabs wiki tracking each 
>distro's packaging.

Something like this: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Sugar_on_Debian ?



>I helped test Jani's Ubuntu packages before the hardy release. 
>Unfortunately I only realised days before the release that the sugar 
>versions included were not the most appropriate versions: taken from a 
>different branch to the stable release. While it looks the same as the 
>stable release (0.75.x in build 703) there are differences, which may 
>mean bugs in the Ubuntu version (0.79.0) which were fixed in the 0.75.x 
>series after that release. So I really want to see distro releases 
>(especially Ubuntu) having the most appropriate versions of the Sugar 
>stack.

...and the (quite recent!) links you provided is valuable for us 
distributors to understand what you mean by "appropriate". :-)


Thanks.


  - Jonas

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

    - Enden er n?r: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIOFhon7DbMsAkQLgRAjenAJ99DeSD4X/QqWc/KORFP/f0l1D5aQCfZCn6
GQvhnNt1W7+mh7XMLAZwcDk=
=y0kb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----