[Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command

[Daniel Narvaez]

Nothing changed in sugar itself, I just fixed obvious bugs, like
environment variables not being consistently respected, nonsense code
duplication etc.

About sugar-build, the change is necessary because you want everything to
be contained in the mounted directory (sugar-build), so that it's available
both inside and outside the chroot. That way you can easily hack on it
outside and run it inside. This is correctly documented on
developer.sugarlabs.org and, as far as I know, nowhere else.

On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:

> I people continue using ~/Activities directory is not a problem, right?
>
> What is the point of move the directory where the activities are installed?
> Changing these directories without a good motive _is_ a problem.
> Nobody will update the documentation, wiki pages,
> tutorials, and development book, then people will be confused.
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez at gmail.com');>
> > wrote:
>
>> Fair enough, I'll let people which cares about gtk2 toolkit and the dev
>> command fix that bug :)
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> Please don't remove the dev command.
>>> It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful.
>>>
>>> Gonzalo
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sorry for the late answer,
>>>>
>>>> 2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>:
>>>> > Hello,
>>>> >
>>>> > as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev
>>>> command
>>>> > is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in
>>>> > sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the fix.
>>>>
>>>> > I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to
>>>> develop
>>>> > directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside
>>>> > sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink
>>>> anyway, if
>>>> > someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is,
>>>> the dev
>>>> > command feels like unnecessary magic to me.
>>>>
>>>> I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel.
>>>>
>>>> From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink.  On the
>>>> other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar
>>>> to install your activity.  As a user, I never had to worry about it,
>>>> it just works.  As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in
>>>> sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very
>>>> nice to have that automated.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> .. manuq ..
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Narvaez
>>
>>
>

-- 
Daniel Narvaez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20130918/fac5d0ec/attachment-0001.html>