Re: [Sugar-devel] Changing the mail header for activities.sugarlabs.org
On Mar 20, 2009, at 4:15 PM, David Farning wrote:
> Could you send more of the email context? I am having trouble
> tracking this down:(
./site/app/controllers/components/editors.php, line 140:
$this->controller->Email->subject = sprintf(_('Mozilla Add-ons: %s
Nomination'), $emailInfo['name']);
./site/app/controllers/components/editors.php, line 271:
$this->controller->Email->subject = sprintf(_('Mozilla Add-ons: %s
%s'), $emailInfo['name'], $emailInfo['version']);
--
Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [Marketing] Marketing to parents...
On Mar 20, 2009, at 1:22 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: > I haven't used Virtualbox, so I don't know if it has the ability to > map > drives or directories into the virtual machine. It does, through a kernel module installed by the guest additions. -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] RAM DoS (was: Re: Fwd: Activity startup idea)
On Mar 19, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Wade Brainerd wrote: > Sugar should always be usable *without* the extra security measures, > they should not become requirements. I will strongly disagree with this assertion. Rainbow does not provide *extra* security measures for Sugar, even though you may think about it that way from a technical point of view. Rainbow provides functionality that is inextricably linked with Sugar's philosophical goals. Consequently, I believe Sugar and Rainbow should continue down the road of ever-closer integration. This says nothing about the learning experiences which are to be had by breaking your machine; the ability to disable security measures was a key Bitfrost design goal. -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] addons.sugarlabs.org
On Feb 13, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > http://addons.sugarlabs.org is up and running I expected this to be activities.sugarlabs.org, since the choice of 'addons' comes from Firefox and isn't part of the usual Sugar vocabulary, no? -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Service announcement scheme - (Re: A small request.)
On Feb 2, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > 'd like to read that paper (anyone got access to IEEE pubs?) <http://radian.org/~krstic/krebs-sd.pdf> -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] programming on thin ice
On Jan 30, 2009, at 4:09 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote: > maybe (as Walter suggested) there was a limit on the imports you could > do? Not possible, and won't be until Brett Cannon's pure-Python import facility replaces the existing C-based import system. That work just landed into 3.0 trunk a week ago or so and is mostly complete, but I don't believe a concrete date/release is known for making it the default. -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [Systems] location for common web files
On Jan 17, 2009, at 4:47 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > I used /var/www-sugarlabs/images on solarsail, but since few people > have access there, maybe we should come up with a > static.sugarlabs.org domain for shared static content and put it on > sunjammer. -1. Doing it that way means that sunjammer going down also makes solarsail's SL web services unusable. Each machine should have its own copies of the static files. -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SVG performance
On Dec 11, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Walter Bender wrote: > not a bad idea until we sort out this rendering issue. It's actually the right idea, period. Except where prohibited by space constraints, unchanging vector graphics should only be rendered into bitmaps once, and reused in that form until an environmental dependency (e.g. current screen resolution) changes. -- Ivan Krstić | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Add Fedora logo to Sugar
On Dec 7, 2008, at 2:46 PM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > Perhaps I explained myself badly, but I was proposing that distros > would place their branding inside a control panel section, what now is > called "About my XO" and that would be renamed to something like > "About my computer". Does it sound sufficiently unobtrusive? +1. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [sugar] XO identity shared via Browse
On Dec 5, 2008, at 12:09 AM, Martin Dengler wrote: > Because it's hard to distinguish gratuitous/personal attacks from a > tough-love I gave a concrete suggestion about a particular use case (XO/XS authentication) -- namely, to stay the hell away from a hard dependency on a stack that's been, without any doubt or question, extremely problematic to get to work even for its very basic purpose. I don't see how this is either gratuitous or personal. > I would love to see the reponse if someone from sugarlabs were to send > an email saying "Bitfrost has a long, colourful history of being > fucking ineffective and its implementation has a number of holes You're confusing Bitfrost and Rainbow. I spent almost no time on the latter, and not by choice; how my time was allocated for a good chunk of my OLPC tenure agitated me greatly and was no small element in my decision to depart, which is entirely off-topic for the present discussion. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [sugar] XO identity shared via Browse
On Dec 4, 2008, at 11:34 PM, Robert McQueen wrote: > I really don't think these kind of comments are productive for anyone. How not? You just wrote a long e-mail explaining *why* things are fucked, not in the least disputing my claim that they are, indeed, fucked. I'm not sure why you felt you needed to defend yourself, as I couldn't care less about dispensing blame. Nonetheless, until all the problems are resolved and there's hard stability data from the field, relying on important (especially security!) services running on top of the collaboration stack is idiotic and indefensible. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [sugar] XO identity shared via Browse
On Dec 4, 2008, at 4:59 PM, Sebastian Silva wrote: > I looked this up. Actually, his only argument that I could find it > suposedly makes phishing easier. I must really disagree. Can we please not duke out the issues with OpenID on this particular list? Go argue with Kim Cameron at <http://idcorner.org/2007/08/22/the-problems-with-openid/ > or something. I originally envisioned a potential use for OpenID within the XO security model in minimizing the number of passwords that needed to be remembered by the kids. I was thinking of strong, automatic OOB authentication to the IdP on the XS as a slightly lesser evil than a browser plugin storing the passwords, as the latter is potentially harder to back up, restore, etc. But I've come around since then -- an XS IdP will probably mean people expect to be able to use their OpenID from anywhere, including e.g. internet cafe machines that are not their XOs, in which case the strong OOB authentication to the IdP would be absent, thus we're back down to a password, thus we go down the rabbit hole of stupidity that I was trying to avoid in the first place. For authenticating the XO to just the XS, OpenID seems downright idiotic, and I'm actually in disbelief about hearing genuine suggestions for OpenID over Jabber. Or, in fact, anything else over Jabber. For those just tuning in, the whole story of Jabber on the XO has basically been colorfully fucked, as has that of the entire collaboration stack. I suggest further proposals of actually using Jabber for anything wait until the basic XO implementation gets to the point where IRC was 20 years ago -- namely, working. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] [housekeeping] archives
I just imported all archives of the original [EMAIL PROTECTED] list for browsing at <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/>, with the exception of November 2008 when both lists existed, and for which only the sugar-devel archive is up on the web. I might do a November re-import at a later date. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
