[Sugar-devel] Sugar-web can't find web socket port

[Daniel Narvaez]

IMO sugarizer and standalone should be both supported modes. Being able to
just load a single activity in a browser is great.

I think what I suggested in a previous thread was to use a well know local
storage key to detect that we are inside sugarizer. Open to other
approaches if anyone has better ideas...

I'm not sure about 0.0.0.0 for webkit1, ideally a local web server would
normally use standalone mode... But I guess it's fine as a short time hack.
Hopefully we will get webkit2 on the XO at some point.

On Tuesday, 25 February 2014, Lionel Laské <lionel at olpc-france.org> wrote:

>
>
>  > What means "Standalone" ?
>>
>> Standalone means
>>
>> http://developer.sugarlabs.org/web-architecture.md.html#web%20activities%20standalone
>>
>> Ok. Thanks for the explanation.
>
>
>>  > FYI the method return true because env.getURLScheme() return "http",
>> so the test condition is false.
>> > Does it mean that the test condition should not be this ?
>>
>> It means you are using WebkitGTK1.  We encourage web development in
>> WebkitGTK2.  The WK1 is a fallback.
>>
>> >
>> > Any suggestion about this method is welcome.
>>
>> I suggest you do web development on sugar-build.  I guess some day XOs
>> will come with latest Fedora.  We can't rely in old Webkit because it
>> limits development.
>
>
> Hmm, I'm using the latest build of Sugar 0.100 here [1].
> Does it means that there is no way to test WK2 on a real XO ?
>
> The reason I'm working to merge Sugarizer with Sugar Web is precisely to
> allow a developer to write web activities for the XO without using
> sugar-build. Today, because of the WK1 issue and this Standalone test it
> means that the generated activity will never work on the XO-4 with Sugar
> 0.100 :-(
>
> Except if you think it's a bad idea, my suggestion is to completely remove
> the "isStandalone" test.
> In fact, with the new "isSugarizer" test that I'm working on, I think we
> could consider that Sugarizer supersede the Standalone mode, so the test is
> not need.
>
> Does it make sense for you ?
>
>                       Lionel.
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Testing
>
>

-- 
Daniel Narvaez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20140225/8071054f/attachment.html>