[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Activity version compatibility
Gary C Martin
gary at garycmartin.com
Tue Oct 13 18:15:31 EDT 2009
On 13 Oct 2009, at 15:29, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 05:35, Wade Brainerd <wadetb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> BTW, we should still answer the question of the activity.info
>> Seems like there 3 options to me:
>> 1) Deprecate host_version in the activity.info spec. Activity
>> write code to test for presence non-BC APIs and provide fallbacks
>> (or else
>> let activities fail to launch/work).
FWIW 1) is the one I've been following (testing for available
features, providing fallbacks, accept failure to launch reports as
bugs to fix). It seems to just be a small number of current Sucrose
activities that are genuinely backwards incompatible with previous
>> 2) Keep host_version as an incrementing number, make
>> activityfactory respect
>> it, and bump the Sugar number from 1 to 2 in 0.86.1 to reflect the
>> 3) Deprecate host_version, introduce sugar_version which is set to
>> oldest Sugar version number the activity is compatible with.
I'd not object to 3) if someone really has a bee in their bonnet ;-b
but I'd be unlikely to use it, and don't see it helping in many real
user cases (it just provides an opportunity to show a prettier error
message). Sugar platform releases seem pretty far down the scale of
reasons for most launch failures, 95% of such cases will be covered by
a smarter pulsing-window launcher for when an Activity fails (bad
distro installs, latest architecture flavour of the week, missing
platform dependancies, new changes in Sugar that break old code, un-
anticipitated security permissions, actual bugs, users hacking on and
>> I'm fine with any of these, let me know and I'll provide the patch.
> Ping, I don't have a strong opinion on this, I think activity authors
> should take the lead on this one.
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Gary C Martin
>> <gary at garycmartin.com>
>>> On 29 Sep 2009, at 14:00, Wade Brainerd wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Gary C Martin <gary at garycmartin.com
>>>> I have a prototype patch which fixes the launch window and adds
>>>> an error
>>>> message. I'll try to get it posted soon.
>>>> Cool :-)
>>>> Ok, a prototype patch is posted at http://dev.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1447
>>>> When an activity fails to start, it immediately displays a
>>>> "<Name> failed
>>>> to start." with a close button.
>>>> If anyone can test it out I would greatly appreciate it. Also if
>>>> have a theory about the occasional segfault when clicking Close,
>>>> or know how
>>>> to get a traceback when running jhbuild, let me know.
>>> Fantastic, looks great, I'm hacking on new Labyrinth toolbars just
>>> now so,
>>> I will apply this and test it on all the tracebacks I get ;-)
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
> What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David
More information about the Sugar-devel