[Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Policy for activities for downstream inclusion

[Simon Schampijer]

On 09/21/2010 03:49 AM, Gary Martin wrote:
> On 20 Sep 2010, at 22:10, Sascha Silbe<sascha-ml-reply-to-2010-3 at silbe.org>  wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Simon Schampijer's message of Mon Sep 20 12:45:28 +0200 2010:
>>
>>>> Do you expect only developers of activities in Fructose to follow that
>>>> process (documented on the Development Team/Release [1] page on the
>>>> wiki) or others as well?
>>>
>>> Ideally all of them, as (a) there are not many activities in Fructose
>>> and (b) concluding from this thread that the packagers would be happy
>>> about it.
>>
>> Then we need to extend a.sl.o to host source tarballs as well. Right now
>> activity developers need to either have a sunjammer account or abuse the
>> wiki if they want to publish
>
> +1 though FWIW the timeline for this is likely to wait until a python port/upgrade of ASLO has happened, perhaps well into next year.

Oh? Isn't it just another upload option as we have already for the .xo?

>>>> If the latter, we should start by documenting this requirement. I couldn't
>>>> find any place in the wiki (that could do with some spring cleaning, BTW)
>>>> explaining how to get your activity published at all, let alone how to
>>>> please packagers.
>>>
>>> Absolutely, that should be documented. I leave this to the activity
>>> maintainers and packagers to define that policy and adding a wiki page
>>> for it - as those are the ones that need to follow it and request it.
>>
>> Let's hope the subject drew enough attention to make someone actually
>> adjust the wiki.
>
> A major point for activity separation from core in my view (and the reason I try to avoid contributing code to Sugar core) is to keep out of, and as far away as possible, from the release cycles. I have no idea what I'll get the chance to work on tomorrow, or next week, even though I keep a detailed todo list. The best I can do is try to shuffle relevant tasks about to try and fit in, but that leaves me working on things inefficiently, and often that I'm least motivated by at the time.

But uploading a tarball or not has nothing to do with the release cycle, 
right? If the packagers know that activities are announced a certain way 
(ASLO email) they can package the new activities as they see fit.

Regards,
    Simon