[Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] Debian complaints

[Tony Anderson]

Hi, Walter

Of course, we need qualified volunteers to undertake the task. So far, 
our release managers have provided support for osbuild but have not 
undertaken to provide a release intended for adoption by a general user 
or by a institutional deployment. The Sugar Labs web site offers 
releases for many platforms, but the email discussion shows that none of 
these can really be considered a stable, tested release.

It appears that the Debian repository, if updated for 0.110 and then 
passing the Debian test procedures should be the proper basis for a 
Raspbian and Ubuntu release.

I would hope our community has some one with the skills and 
determination to take this on.

Tony

On 12/17/2016 09:34 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> Tony,
>
> I cannot separate the desire to have an easy install on Debian from 
> the work needed to achieve that goal. Hence my asking that we expand 
> this discussion to include those who might be able to help us do that 
> work.
>
> -walter
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Tony Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net 
> <mailto:tony_anderson at usa.net>> wrote:
>
>     Hi, Walter
>
>     We again seem to have a problem in communication. My concern is
>     not to solve a specific problem. My concern is to leverage this
>     Debian process to help
>     Sugar Labs offer an effective release of Sugar that can become a
>     viable alternative for educators to implement. This can not
>     require specific technical knowledge such as the sugar developers
>     have, but the ability to install Sugar on an ordinary laptop. This
>     is handled by Libre Office. I can install Libre Office on an Xo
>     with the following script:
>
>     echo 'install libreoffice'
>     cd libreoffice
>     sudo rpm -Uvh *.rpm
>     cd $here
>
>     where libreoffice is a directory containing the Libre Office rpms.
>     This requires no access to the internet nor any special technical
>     skills. The
>     overall script is
>
>     cd /run/media/olpc/xo175
>     bash xo-custom
>
>     where xo175 is the label of the USB drive.
>
>     Why can't we have something as simple for Sugar? Debian seems to
>     be spending some effort to package Sugar in their repository. Why
>     can't we expend
>     a little effort so that Sugar can be installed by dpkg -i sugar?
>
>     I addressed this to SLOBS because I think this is a Sugar Labs
>     issue, not a technical one.
>
>     Tony
>
>
>     On 12/17/2016 04:50 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
>>     None of this seems like it would be difficult to resolve. We need
>>     to find someone who is in the debian world to jump in. Can you
>>     cross post to sugar-devel?
>>
>>     thx
>>
>>     On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Tony Anderson
>>     <tony_anderson at usa.net <mailto:tony_anderson at usa.net>> wrote:
>>
>>         I continue to get messages like this - I suspect because I
>>         signed up for pkg-sugar-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>>         <mailto:pkg-sugar-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org>. However,
>>         there doesn't appear to be anyone from the Sugar community
>>         involved.
>>
>>         Format: 1.8
>>         Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 17:10:30 +0100
>>         Source: sugar-imageviewer-activity
>>         Binary: sugar-imageviewer-activity
>>         Architecture: source all
>>         Version: 62-3
>>         Distribution: unstable
>>         Urgency: medium
>>         Maintainer: Debian Sugar
>>         Team<pkg-sugar-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
>>         <mailto:pkg-sugar-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org>>
>>         Changed-By: Jonas Smedegaard<dr at jones.dk <mailto:dr at jones.dk>>
>>         Description:
>>          sugar-imageviewer-activity - Sugar Learning Platform - image
>>         viewing activity
>>         Changes:
>>          sugar-imageviewer-activity (62-3) unstable; urgency=medium
>>          .
>>            * Update copyright info:
>>              + Update URLs to reflect new Github home.
>>              + Extend coverage for Debian packaging.
>>            * Declare compliance with Debian Policy 3.9.8.
>>            * Fix broken path in desktop file.
>>            * Have git-buildpackage filter any .git* file.
>>            * Modernize CDBS use:
>>              + Generalize resolving build-dependency on python.
>>              + Build-depend on licensecheck (not devscripts).
>>
>>         Is there anyone who cares? Since Sugar Labs does not make a
>>         Debian release of Sugar, perhaps we should tell Debian to
>>         drop Sugar and forget about it.
>>         Naturally, we would be turning our back on the opportunity to
>>         create a Sugar release for Debian which would install on
>>         Ubuntu and Raspbian and. potentially, Windows 10.
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         SLOBs mailing list
>>         SLOBs at lists.sugarlabs.org <mailto:SLOBs at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>>         http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>         <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Walter Bender
>>     Sugar Labs
>>     http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20161217/9dccee91/attachment.html>