[Sugar-devel] Change request: Fix open with API

[Gonzalo Odiard]

Ok, I will do.
Thanks all for the review and comments.

Gonzalo

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Martin Abente <
martin.abente.lahaye at gmail.com> wrote:

> Considering that James, Sam and I have reviewed and tested these changes,
> the consensus is to include them to fix the API. Therefore, Gonzalo has
> green light for merge.
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Tony Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net>
> wrote:
>
>>  Thanks James and Sam for your replies.
>>
>> The references to Rainbow Security model are a bit confusing. The Rainbow
>> model was dropped by the second G1G1 as I recollect. As far as I can tell,
>> Browse launches child processes (pdfviewer). These typically are
>> represented in the frame by a grey circle.
>>
>> I apologize on the argparse issue, I am still with 13.2. I was confused
>> by the documentation:
>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Start_activity_from_another_activity
>>
>> "An activity can start other activity by:
>>
>>    - knowing the activity ID - starts that specific activity"
>>
>> I assume that is a typo and bundle_id is meant.
>>  By having sugar-launch pass the -u (uri) and -o (object_id) options, it
>> is possible now (and possibly since 0.82) to launch an activity by activity
>> bundle_id either with a Journal object or a file from the Documents
>> directory (visible in Journal) or a USB key (also visible in Journal).  I
>> have been using the -o and -u options in sugar-launch for at least five
>> years. This was discussed when this feature was first proposed.
>>
>> In effect, the api added to 106 is simply an alternate way to perform
>> existing functions.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> On 07/03/2015 09:29 AM, Sam P. wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> I think you have misunderstood the capabilities of the api.
>>
>> The api does not support launching with uris (which is something to look
>> into for 108) or "activity ids".
>>
>> The api supports bundle ids (open a new terminal activity) and object ids
>> (open this memorize set).  This allows for many of the use cases you
>> described although being very simple.
>>
>> Directly using sugar-launch from activity processes is suboptimal, as
>> activities should not launch child processes (Rainbow security model).
>> This was discussed when the feature was being implemented.
>>
>> I do not see why a feature that has some use cases and does not
>> destabilise the rest of the system should be dropped so late in the cycle.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sam
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>


-- 
Gonzalo Odiard

SugarLabs - Software [for | by] children learning
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20150703/2fa99acd/attachment.html>