[Sugar-devel] [GSOC] Font Editor Next Steps

Tony Anderson tony_anderson at usa.net
Sun Jul 3 07:39:06 EDT 2016

Hi, Sam

I don't see any relevance to a package manager for an installed Sugar 
system. One of Sugar's major benefits is that users can modify the 
source of any file and immediately see the consequences. Any user who 
can open the Terminal activity can type 'sudo rm -rf' to great effect.

If we are going to introduce users to creating and editing fonts they 
need to learn CRUD (Create, read, update, delete). Naturally, the editor 
can caution about the effect of modifying or deleting system fonts (and 
probably identifying them). Hopefully, our user will be able to make her 
font the system font.


On 07/03/2016 12:49 PM, Sam Parkinson wrote:
> Hi Tony,
> I agree with you that we should avoid "training wheels".  However, I 
> don't think that we should unintentionally let users break the system 
> - we still need to have clear ui.  If we are going to let users 
> uninstall system files, we should at least warn them.
> Also, in my opinion, if we are going touch files the package manager 
> installed, we should do that via the package manager.  Package 
> managers are amazing, and we don't need to make their job harder. 
>  However, integrating package manger support would be a very hard 
> task, and maybe it would be easier to just not expose a delete ui for 
> system fonts?
> Thanks,
> Sam
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Tony Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net> 
> wrote:
>> Hi Sam,
>> I have enjoyed this sort of comment before. We go to great trouble to 
>> show users the source code of Sugar with the apparent intent that 
>> they should
>> experiment with making changes. Then developers comment, but 'they 
>> could break the system!'. What is wrong with giving the users the 
>> opportunity to delete a font and see the consequences. That is how we 
>> learn. Do we really want a Sugar with 'training wheels'?
>> Tony
>> On 07/02/2016 02:40 PM, Sam Parkinson wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Yash Agarwal 
>>> <agrwal.ysh94 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Work report
>>>> I worked on the following issues:
>>>> Adding support for ufoz format
>>>> Adding git submodules
>>>> The editor has been integrated with the activity
>>>> I'll begin adding the features for manipulating the bezier curves 
>>>> over the weekend
>>>> I'll make the complete week report on Sunday
>>>> A question to ponder upon:
>>>> Should we make 2 separate activities
>>>> A font manager
>>>> A font editor
>>>> The manager will have root access and be integrated into sugars 
>>>> glucose module (correct me if I'm wrong) so that it's there with 
>>>> the pre installed activities
>>>> The editor will be separate and will only deal in ufoz /ufo format
>>> Hi Yash,
>>> Why do we need root to install fonts?  Can't you just manage the 
>>> fonts in "~/.fonts" and call the rest of the fonts system fonts.  We 
>>> really shouldn't make it easy for users to delete system fonts - it 
>>> will annoy the package manager and it will probably break 
>>> applications.  We don't want users thinking "I don't use Deja Vu 
>>> Sans" and then having a very odd looking Sugar because they 
>>> uninstalled the font we use in the UI.
>>> Maybe it would be best to add a control panel for fonts?  Activities 
>>> must have state, and write something to the journal.  Control panels 
>>> don't have to write a state to the journal.  Control panels are 
>>> "extensions" in sugar terms, meaning they are loaded from either 
>>> "/usr/share/sugar/extensions/cpsection/" or 
>>> "~/.sugar/$SUGAR_PROFILE/extensions".  This means that you could 
>>> include the font control panel extension with your app, and then 
>>> install it on your app's first run.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sam
>>>> On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 21:28 Dave Crossland, <dave at lab6.com> wrote:
>>>>     Great stuff Yash!
>>>>     The blog needs a bit of attention...
>>>>     https://github.com/sugarlabs/edit-fonts-activity/commit/cbdfaf2a2c5320ac417124ebd050087588cd4e6c
>>>>     is posted 10 days ago, but it wasnt on a friday, which is when
>>>>     we have
>>>>     to check in with walter, so I renamed it to
>>>>     https://sugarlabs.github.io/edit-fonts-activity/bezier-editing-works
>>>>     However, you've then duplicated this file and appended to it -
>>>>     https://sugarlabs.github.io/edit-fonts-activity/week-5-work -
>>>>     so that
>>>>     its the same at the top
>>>>     Please remove duplicate content :)
>>>>     Also
>>>>     https://github.com/sugarlabs/edit-fonts-activity/blob/gh-pages/_posts/2016-06-28-week-5-work_wip.md
>>>>     seems to be not needed, so I made a PR to remove it,
>>>>     https://github.com/sugarlabs/edit-fonts-activity/pull/47
>>>>     Since (a) you can set a post to not be published if you want to
>>>>     draft
>>>>     it on gh-pages, and (b) you can draft it in a git branch and only
>>>>     merge it when its ready, I suggest not creating such WIP files in
>>>>     future :) I have been trying to make blog posts with the  (b)
>>>>     process
>>>>     but (a) is also fine, as you did in
>>>>     https://github.com/sugarlabs/edit-fonts-activity/commit/6507a9efbb266d31deadd3d4fccf5f190e6f8af0
>>>>     :)
>>>>     Secondly, the filename of a Jekyll post must be unique after
>>>>     the date,
>>>>     so I made a PR to rename the latest features checklist,
>>>>     https://github.com/sugarlabs/edit-fonts-activity/pull/48
>>>>     Please do review and merge these when you can :)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20160703/7fcf453f/attachment.html>

More information about the Sugar-devel mailing list