Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

Dissent. 1. For the duplication by Tony from activities.sugarlabs.org to github.com/sugarlabs; - for the commit history, we still have the original repository for some activities. - for the source code, now we have two places for some activities; the original repository, and a copy with a

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

On Apr 23, 2017 11:21 PM, "Tony Anderson" wrote: Hi James, Walter I reviewed the 71 activities for which I created a repository in github/sugarlabs Thank you Tony! Unless I hear to the contrary, I'll delete these duplicates. Sounds good to me My understanding from the

Re: [Sugar-devel] motion for a new mission statement

On Apr 21, 2017 9:06 PM, "Tony Anderson" wrote: How is this not redundant to the motion approved in January 2017? For me it's an obvious incremental improvement. You can call it redundant if you think it's adds zero new value, but I am skeptical of that.

Re: [Sugar-devel] motion for a new mission statement

My problem with this exercise is it again postpones action to fulfill the mission. The most critical need (under any version of the mission statement) is to make Sugar available on a wide range of contemporary platforms so that we can escape the view that Sugar is locked to the XO. We then

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 11:21:21PM -0400, Dave Crossland wrote: > > On Apr 23, 2017 7:08 PM, "James Cameron" <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote: > > We cannot host repositories on GitHub that don't have a license. > > That was true in the early days of github but it's no longer > true. In fact

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

Hi James, Walter I reviewed the 71 activities for which I created a repository in github/sugarlabs. Of these 47 are not duplicates to repositories on git.sugalabs.org. The duplicates are: abecedarium-5.xo amazonas_tortuga-2.xo analyze_journal-5.xo analyze-8.xo anno-1.xo annotate-1.xo

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

On Apr 23, 2017 7:08 PM, "James Cameron" wrote: We cannot host repositories on GitHub that don't have a license. That was true in the early days of github but it's no longer true. In fact it's a big problem, because a lot of stuff is posted on github without a libre license

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:21:40AM +0800, Tony Anderson wrote: > Hi James, Walter > > I reviewed the 71 activities for which I created a repository in > github/ sugarlabs. > > Of these 47 are not duplicates to repositories on git.sugalabs.org. But you omit repositories in other than

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:48:16AM +0800, Tony Anderson wrote: > 1. The original repository is ASLO. No, the originals were mostly on laptop.org and on developer web sites, including Gitorious and GitHub. > The git.sugarlabs.org was added later. No, the Sugar Labs Gitorious instance was set up

Re: [Sugar-devel] motion for a new mission statement

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:58:45AM +0800, Tony Anderson wrote: > My problem with this exercise is it again postpones action to > fulfill the mission. The board is responsible for what it talks about and decides, and it is not for me to complain about their prioritisation, since I'm not a board

Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Activities added to GithHub

1. The original repository is ASLO. The git.sugarlabs.org was added later. The intent, as I understand it, is to have the master source code under git version control on github as a replacement for git.sugarlabs.org. The git record of the programming change from version to version should be