[Sugar-devel] Activities added to GithHub
tony_anderson at usa.net
Sat Apr 22 23:25:49 EDT 2017
Thanks to all for the valuable suggestions.
Your advice seems to me to check on each activity in ASLO to see if it
has a repository on git.sugarlabs.org. Since there is no obvious way to
know if the current repository in git.sugarlabs.org is consistent with
the version(s) on ASLO.
Are you comfortable with making the most recent version on ASLO a build
Should I send an email to the developer on git if active on github (or
from recent activity on the lists) to make the move as they feel
In any case, the person creating the repository on github must have
owner authority in github.
I still have received no advice on how the repository should be filled
out (.gitignore, readme, license, ....).
On 04/23/2017 11:11 AM, Samuel Cantero wrote:
> I'm agree with Walter.
> We should move activities repos from git.sugarlabs.org
> <http://git.sugarlabs.org> to github.org <http://github.org> with the
> whole commit history. It would be nice to keep all repos with same
> format in name and inside one Github organization
> exclusively dedicated for activities.
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Tony Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net
> <mailto:tony_anderson at usa.net>> wrote:
> Hi, Ignacio
> I am open to suggestions (accusations not accepted). I am a newbie
> in this and largely unqualified; however, I don't see a rush of
> more qualified volunteers to take this task on.
> Many, possibly a majority of these activities have not been
> touched since 2010. I would not like to wait until we get contact
> from contributors who have moved on to a day job.
> If all of the ASLO activities can be moved as repositories to
> github/sugarlabs - nothing has been lost. Corrections can be made
> to those repositories to include the famous 'repeal and replace'.
> The immediate benefit is that the developer hub on ASLO can be
> discontinued simplifying an effort to make ALSO itself more stable
> and maintainable.
> In addition, github makes it easier for the community at large to
> make corrections or improvements to the activities knowing that
> they are working on the one and only official version.
> In any case, a repository appears to give no credit to the creator
> - only to contributors. Contributions are, by definition, post the
> move of the repository to github.
> I am looking for advice on how to relate git.sugarlabs.org
> <http://git.sugarlabs.org> to the github repositories.
> On 04/23/2017 10:23 AM, Ignacio Rodríguez wrote:
>> I think we should focus on contact the creators of the activities
>> before moving them -- sugar-activities org basically contains all
>> aslo activities and nothing else (which can be used in case any
>> activity has no maintainer/git repository) --; probably most of
>> the activities are in git.sugarlabs.org
>> <http://git.sugarlabs.org> (so we can move them safely).
>> On Apr 22, 2017 22:24, "Walter Bender" <walter.bender at gmail.com
>> <mailto:walter.bender at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> I can not speak for every contributor, but there is a lot
>> more to contributing to a project than the end result. Many
>> contributors take pride in their contributions and these
>> days, one's GitHub contributions have value in the job
>> market. A wholesale removal of the git history by Sugar Labs
>> does not send a very welcoming message to past or future
>> contributors. On a more mundane level, the lack of history
>> means as a developer I have no way of knowing whom to ask for
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tony Anderson
>> <tony_anderson at usa.net <mailto:tony_anderson at usa.net>> wrote:
>> The process for installing repositories requires that the
>> target repository be empty.
>> I would appreciate someone who could itemize what needs
>> to be in a repository such as the license, .gitignore,
>> README.md, and so on. Much of that can probably be done
>> by a script using the information available from ASLO.
>> My sense is that PRs are appropriate for changes to an
>> activities functions (such as a port to gtk3) but not for
>> On 04/23/2017 07:27 AM, Love Mehta wrote:
>>> There are many activities lacking a description at
>>> https://github.com/sugar-activities/ and it is hard to
>>> know the name and purpose of the activity specially in
>>> the web activities where one has to open the index.html
>>> file. I think we should add the descriptions from
>>> https://activities.sugarlabs.org for each activity to
>>> the readme markdown file. I thought of doing this but
>>> this will lead to a large number of pull requests.
>>> Should I go ahead with it?
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Sugar-devel