<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    Hi,<br>
    <br>
    It would really be helpful for us to get an explanation when working
    activities are deliberately broken ('deprecated') as in this case.
    What is the new means to implement collaboration? What advantage
    does it offer to the 'tubes' method we have been using from the
    beginning? Is this another example of Fedora run amok? <br>
    <br>
    As you say, the traditional way to handle this particular case would
    be to re-write the 'tubes' api using whatever the new method is so
    that the existing <br>
    applications do not have to be modified. This, after all, was the
    purpose of 'object programming'.<br>
    <br>
    It is really frustrating when one is trying to provide new
    capabilities for the XO to have to spend almost all of the time
    re-implementing activities that have stopped working in the newer
    releases.<br>
    <br>
    Tony<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/24/2015 12:34 AM, Sam P. wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CACVKbrXh4LqJ1V6rKGc8BpcryZy87iuXwSVfMXRic-4M-WUa+Q@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">Hi Martin,<br>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 6:52 AM,
            Martin Abente <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:martin.abente.lahaye@gmail.com"
                target="_blank">martin.abente.lahaye@gmail.com</a>></span>
            wrote:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div>Hello everyone,</div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div>I have been reviewing the current state of the
                  collaboration proposals and I am afraid it is still
                  too early for merging it. We need to explore more use
                  cases, and this will only happens when we start
                  porting more Activities that actually use TUBES.
                  Therefore, i want to share some thoughts on this.</div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div><b>Opinions:</b></div>
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>There haven't been enough changes in the
                      Activities regarding Tubes deprecation.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>Dropping the Tubes support from Sugar without
                      changing all the activities that depend on Tubes
                      means that we will break collaboration for those
                      activities anyway, and there wont be much gain by
                      just doing that.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>Making changes in the Sugar API without proper
                      testing with more activities (and scenarios) is
                      simply not a good idea.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>But, making changes in the Activities can be
                      easily handled since they are self contained.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>Most of our users still use Fedora 18 through
                      OLPC deployments, where Tubes is available.</li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
                <div><b>Suggestions:</b></div>
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>Lets make Sugar handle the Tubes deprecation
                      better so it doesn't break, but lets not remove
                      the support for TUBES yet.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>Instead, we can start changing the activities
                      using the Wrapper that Walter and Sam prepared,
                      but using it locally on each Activity for now.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>Once and if, we have most of our activities
                      ported to the new telepathy API (which will be
                      based on the Wrapper), then we can include the
                      Wrapper into sugar-toolkit-gtk3, in a next release
                      and remove it from Activities.</li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
                <div><b>Pros:</b></div>
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>We avoid breaking collaboration for <b>(a)</b>
                      Activities that use TUBES and run on older systems
                      where TUBES is available, and <b>(b)</b>
                      Activities that does not use TUBES on newer
                      systems where TUBES is no longer available. This
                      _is_ an improvement versus the current situation
                      where is completely broken on newer systems.</li>
                    <li>We do this whole re-work incrementally, without
                      having to change the API (sort of) blindly.<br>
                    </li>
                    <li>There will be more flexibility to explore ideas
                      in Activities land.</li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
                <div><b>Cons:</b></div>
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>There will be repeated code in Activities, but
                      that can be changed easily later.<br>
                    </li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div><b>What would be needed:</b></div>
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>To detect if there is TUBES support, as Sam
                      mentioned in his first PR [1]. <b>Can someone
                        look into this?</b></li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I looked into this a while ago, and it didn't seem that
              it would be easy.  Maybe we could add a gsetting that
              defaults to off (for new distros) and then OLPC OS Builder
              can turn it on to say give activities tubes? </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li><br>
                    </li>
                    <li>Do not create TUBES channel when there is not
                      support. This [2] is just a hack and the logic
                      works fine, but it depends on whether or not we
                      can detect support.</li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>Cleanup the Wrapper and make sure that it is
                      possible to use it locally in activities.</li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>Yep, the wrapper can already be used locally in
              activities, see Bibliography activity [1] and physics
              activity [2].</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>However, I do believe that the fact that activities are
              using a wrapper doesn't stop up from also having it in
              sugar3.  As you noted, it is repeated code in activities. 
              It is easier to change the sugar3 code later as needed
              than to change the wrapper code in every activity. 
              Therefore, I believe that we should have a try/except
              clause to preference the sugar3 wrapper, but fallback to
              the local one.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div> </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div><b>Other improvements that we could land now:</b></div>
                <div>
                  <ol>
                    <li>Give more flexibility to activities to use file
                      transfer channels without having the shell messing
                      with them. [3]</li>
                  </ol>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>As a note, the wrapper makes heavy use of file
              transfers (eg. for init) currently.  This does result in
              shell notifications on older Sugars, although the
              activities can still collaborate.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Good write up by the way.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Thanks,</div>
            <div>Sam</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/samdroid-apps/bibliography-activity/tree/collab">https://github.com/samdroid-apps/bibliography-activity/tree/collab</a></div>
            <div>[2] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="https://github.com/walterbender/physics/pull/10">https://github.com/walterbender/physics/pull/10</a> <br>
            </div>
            <div> </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div><b>Conclusions:</b></div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div>If we don't do something about this, next Sugar
                  releases will still be broken for collaboration, for
                  more scenarios than necessary.</div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div>Let me know what you guys think,<br>
                </div>
                <div>Martin.</div>
                <div><br>
                </div>
                <div><b>Refs:</b></div>
                <div>[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/pull/270"
                    target="_blank">https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/pull/270</a></div>
                <div>[2] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/tchx84/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/commit/bed0ac5f4259ff1669323db26acb27f5d9c8ed1f"
                    target="_blank">https://github.com/tchx84/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/commit/bed0ac5f4259ff1669323db26acb27f5d9c8ed1f</a></div>
                <div>[3] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/621"
                    target="_blank">https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar/pull/621</a></div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>