[Sugar-devel] A small request.

[Bernie Innocenti]

C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> OK, thanks.  The existing updater works fine in Debian; I don't know
> if it was ever pushed into koji, but it is certainly compatible with
> Fedora.  If anyone wants to develop a new updater, I can probably
> offer some advice.  Using an explicit update_url field in the activity
> is recommended for activities packaged with the current updater; the
> OLPC wiki default was only ever intended to be a bridge for legacy
> apps, not a recommended practice.  I prefer email for initial
> discussions of updater ideas: 9am isn't a great meeting time for me.

How did the Debian package cope with the dependency on olpc-update?
I thought we had to break that and integrate the relevant support
files in the control panel module.

Another issue is how we integrate the updater with addons.sl.o.
Because the OLPC microformat is trivial, it might be easy to modify
the remora's html output to be compatible with it.  Mick, Tomeu and
David, who have had a closer look at the code, might want to comment.

With a web UI similar to addons.mozilla.org, the local UI for browsing
new activities becomes redundant and could be culled, reducing the
control panel module to a mere updater.  I guess this is for the UI
designers to decide.

See also:
  http://sugarlabs.org/go/ActivityTeam/Remora_port
  http://sugarlabs.org/go/DevelopmentTeam/a.s.o
  http://people.sugarlabs.org/dfarning/aslo_patches/


> http://cananian.livejournal.com/48460.html also has some thoughts
> on updaters.

Regarding the integration with PackageKit, long-term that would be the
best course, but since it would take a big rewrite I doubt it can
happen within the 0.84 time frame.

Unless someone else steps up, I volunteer to do the minimum necessary
integration work to make the current updater work in SoaS with
addons.sl.o as a backend.

-- 
   // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/
 \X/  Sugar Labs       - http://www.sugarlabs.org/