<div>Nothing changed in sugar itself, I just fixed obvious bugs, like environment variables not being consistently respected, nonsense code duplication etc.<br></div><div><br></div><div>About sugar-build, the change is necessary because you want everything to be contained in the mounted directory (sugar-build), so that it's available both inside and outside the chroot. That way you can easily hack on it outside and run it inside. This is correctly documented on <a href="http://developer.sugarlabs.org">developer.sugarlabs.org</a> and, as far as I know, nowhere else.<br>
<br>On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I people continue using ~/Activities directory is not a problem, right?<div>
<br></div><div>What is the point of move the directory where the activities are installed?</div><div>Changing these directories without a good motive _is_ a problem.</div>
<div>Nobody will update the documentation, wiki pages,</div><div>tutorials, and development book, then people will be confused.</div><div><br></div><div>Gonzalo </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com');" target="_blank">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Fair enough, I'll let people which cares about gtk2 toolkit and the dev command fix that bug :)<div><div><br><br>On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">-1<div><br></div><div>Please don't remove the dev command.</div><div>It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful.</div><div><br></div><div>Gonzalo</div></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones <span dir="ltr"><<a>manuq@laptop.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Sorry for the late answer,<br>
<br>
2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez <<a>dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
<div>> Hello,<br>
><br>
> as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command<br>
> is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in<br>
> sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently).<br>
<br>
</div>Thanks for the fix.<br>
<div><br>
> I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop<br>
> directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside<br>
> sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if<br>
> someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev<br>
> command feels like unnecessary magic to me.<br>
<br>
</div>I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel.<br>
<br>
>From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the<br>
other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar<br>
to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it,<br>
it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in<br>
sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very<br>
nice to have that automated.<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
.. manuq ..<br>
</font></span><div><div>_______________________________________________<br>
Sugar-devel mailing list<br>
<a>Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote><br><br></div></div><span><font color="#888888">-- <br>Daniel Narvaez<br><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br>-- <br>Daniel Narvaez<br><br>