[Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Etoys in RC4 SoaS-v7 does not start when jabber is connected. ( f17 release is imminent )

[Peter Robinson]

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> On 28.05.2012, at 19:06, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> What else can we do besides fixing issues and hoping you package the result? That's our take on trying to "actively improve the situation".
>>>
>>> Again, Etoys 5 starts fine, Etoys 4.1 not. But we cannot really test distro stuff if it has not been packaged yet.
>>
>> The last release I remember seeing was an RC (don't remember if it was
>> RC1 or 2) and I had issues and never got back to it and if I must have
>> missed the final release.
>
> I had assumed you would package even release candidates so they can be tested in the distro.

I generally would but I had issues and forgot and no one reminded me.

> The final release is the last release candidate, Etoys 5.0.2406. I failed to send a separate notice for that, sorry.
>
>>  Ultimately it would be nice if the
>> developers of their Activities checked and tested and emailed the SoaS
>> list if they have issues or the new versions have been missed.
>
> Okay. I didn't want to bug you immediately, and after a while forgot.

Better to bug immediately then I can tag it to deal with it and you
won't forget ;-)

>> We have
>> nightly builds right through the dev process and various
>> Alpha/Beta/RCs etc in the lead up to final for testing. I can't test
>> everything and I'm not fallible and the process we use has clearly
>> defined [1] development schedule to know when fixes need to be in by.
>
> I did send the release announcement on March 30th, so that should have been fine for the F17 beta.

I must have missed it.

>>> Regarding the locale directory layout: I did not find a ticket in any of the trackers, neither upstream nor at sugarlabs or olpc. What would make the packaging easier for you?
>>
>> To use the same layout that is used by everything else so we can use
>> the standard distro tools to deal with them. Probably the best package
>> to look at is TurtleArt.
>
> Would a symlink be acceptable? This would make it easier for Etoys to find the right system folder.

symlinks don't work with the Fedora packaging language tools, I prefer
that as it's what the rest of the sugar stack works with.

>        /usr/share/etoys/locale -> ../../locale
>
>        (would resolve to /usr/share/locale)
>
> If we prefix all Etoys .mo files then they could be installed to the system folder.

If you use the usual flags as used by all packages for Linux distros
it means you're standard and it will work with all the various linux
distro options.

Peter