subject:"\[Sugar\-devel\] Abandoned or orphaned activities"

[Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-17 Thread James Cameron

Once we had a list of abandoned activities, where the maintainer is
missing in action, not doing testing or releasing.

Now, I propose the inverse; a list of activities with a maintainer
testing and releasing.  It will be easier to maintain that list.

For myself, each of the Fructose activities, each of the activities we
ship on OLPC OS.  I know Walter is looking after Music Blocks.  Lionel
is looking after Sugarizer.  Are there any other developers who are
maintainers?

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-18 Thread Rahul Bothra

I am maintaining CowBulls and Flappy.

I can take up cedit and Polari

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:53 PM James Cameron  wrote:

> Once we had a list of abandoned activities, where the maintainer is
> missing in action, not doing testing or releasing.
>
> Now, I propose the inverse; a list of activities with a maintainer
> testing and releasing.  It will be easier to maintain that list.
>
> For myself, each of the Fructose activities, each of the activities we
> ship on OLPC OS.  I know Walter is looking after Music Blocks.  Lionel
> is looking after Sugarizer.  Are there any other developers who are
> maintainers?
>
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.netrek.org/
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-20 Thread James Cameron

Thanks.  So the list looks like;

# Walter Bender

* Music Blocks,
* Turtle Blocks JS,

# Rahul Bothra

* CowBulls,
* Flappy,
* Cedit,
* Polari,

# James Cameron

* Abacus,
* Browse (master),
* Browse (fedora 18 - webkit - v157.x),
* Calculator,
* Chart,
* Chat,
* Clock,
* Develop,
* Distance,
* Finance,
* Find Words,
* Fototoon,
* Fraction Bounce,
* Gears,
* GetBooks,
* Help,
* ImageViewer,
* Implode,
* Jukebox,
* Labyrinth,
* Letters,
* Log,
* Maze,
* Measure,
* Memorize,
* Moon (master),
* Moon (fedora 18 - gtk2 - v17.x),
* MusicKeyboard (master),
* MusicKeyboard (fedora 18 - csound - v8.x),
* Paint,
* Physics,
* Pippy,
* Poll,
* Portfolio,
* Read (master),
* Read (fedora 18 - webkit - v118.x),
* Record (master),
* Record (fedora 18 - gstreamer - v10x),
* SimpleEnglishWikipedia,
* Speak,
* StopWatch,
* Story,
* Terminal,
* TurtleBlocks,
* Words,
* Write,

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 09:04:50AM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> I am actively maintaining Music Blocks and Turtle Blocks JS.
> I just haven't had the bandwidth to do much beyond that of late. That said, I
> am happy to kibbutz on any of the activities which I used to maintain.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:11 AM Rahul Bothra <[1]rrbot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> *
> I am maintaining CowBulls and Flappy.
> 
> I can take up cedit and Polari
> 
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:53 PM James Cameron <[2]qu...@laptop.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> Once we had a list of abandoned activities, where the maintainer is
> missing in action, not doing testing or releasing.
> 
> Now, I propose the inverse; a list of activities with a maintainer
> testing and releasing.  It will be easier to maintain that list.
> 
> For myself, each of the Fructose activities, each of the activities we
> ship on OLPC OS.  I know Walter is looking after Music Blocks.  Lionel
> is looking after Sugarizer.  Are there any other developers who are
> maintainers?
> 
> --
> James Cameron
> [3]http://quozl.netrek.org/
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> [4]Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> [5]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> 
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> [6]Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> [7]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> 
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> [8]http://www.sugarlabs.org
> [9]
> 
> References:
> 
> [1] mailto:rrbot...@gmail.com
> [2] mailto:qu...@laptop.org
> [3] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> [4] mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> [5] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> [6] mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> [7] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> [8] http://www.sugarlabs.org/
> [9] http://www.sugarlabs.org/

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-20 Thread Walter Bender

I noticed Dimensions fell off the list. I will take that one on as I think
it is of real value.

-walter

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 8:44 AM James Cameron  wrote:

> Thanks.  So the list looks like;
>
> # Walter Bender
>
> * Music Blocks,
> * Turtle Blocks JS,
>
> # Rahul Bothra
>
> * CowBulls,
> * Flappy,
> * Cedit,
> * Polari,
>
> # James Cameron
>
> * Abacus,
> * Browse (master),
> * Browse (fedora 18 - webkit - v157.x),
> * Calculator,
> * Chart,
> * Chat,
> * Clock,
> * Develop,
> * Distance,
> * Finance,
> * Find Words,
> * Fototoon,
> * Fraction Bounce,
> * Gears,
> * GetBooks,
> * Help,
> * ImageViewer,
> * Implode,
> * Jukebox,
> * Labyrinth,
> * Letters,
> * Log,
> * Maze,
> * Measure,
> * Memorize,
> * Moon (master),
> * Moon (fedora 18 - gtk2 - v17.x),
> * MusicKeyboard (master),
> * MusicKeyboard (fedora 18 - csound - v8.x),
> * Paint,
> * Physics,
> * Pippy,
> * Poll,
> * Portfolio,
> * Read (master),
> * Read (fedora 18 - webkit - v118.x),
> * Record (master),
> * Record (fedora 18 - gstreamer - v10x),
> * SimpleEnglishWikipedia,
> * Speak,
> * StopWatch,
> * Story,
> * Terminal,
> * TurtleBlocks,
> * Words,
> * Write,
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 09:04:50AM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> > I am actively maintaining Music Blocks and Turtle Blocks JS.
> > I just haven't had the bandwidth to do much beyond that of late. That
> said, I
> > am happy to kibbutz on any of the activities which I used to maintain.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:11 AM Rahul Bothra <[1]rrbot...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > *
> > I am maintaining CowBulls and Flappy.
> >
> > I can take up cedit and Polari
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:53 PM James Cameron <[2]qu...@laptop.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > Once we had a list of abandoned activities, where the maintainer
> is
> > missing in action, not doing testing or releasing.
> >
> > Now, I propose the inverse; a list of activities with a
> maintainer
> > testing and releasing.  It will be easier to maintain that list.
> >
> > For myself, each of the Fructose activities, each of the
> activities we
> > ship on OLPC OS.  I know Walter is looking after Music Blocks.
> Lionel
> > is looking after Sugarizer.  Are there any other developers who
> are
> > maintainers?
> >
> > --
> > James Cameron
> > [3]http://quozl.netrek.org/
> > ___
> > Sugar-devel mailing list
> > [4]Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> > [5]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> >
> > ___
> > Sugar-devel mailing list
> > [6]Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> > [7]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> >
> > --
> > Walter Bender
> > Sugar Labs
> > [8]http://www.sugarlabs.org
> > [9]
> >
> > References:
> >
> > [1] mailto:rrbot...@gmail.com
> > [2] mailto:qu...@laptop.org
> > [3] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> > [4] mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> > [5] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> > [6] mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> > [7] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> > [8] http://www.sugarlabs.org/
> > [9] http://www.sugarlabs.org/
>
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.netrek.org/
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>


-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-20 Thread Walter Bender

I am actively maintaining Music Blocks and Turtle Blocks JS.
I just haven't had the bandwidth to do much beyond that of late. That said,
I am happy to kibbutz on any of the activities which I used to maintain.

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:11 AM Rahul Bothra  wrote:

> I am maintaining CowBulls and Flappy.
>
> I can take up cedit and Polari
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:53 PM James Cameron  wrote:
>
>> Once we had a list of abandoned activities, where the maintainer is
>> missing in action, not doing testing or releasing.
>>
>> Now, I propose the inverse; a list of activities with a maintainer
>> testing and releasing.  It will be easier to maintain that list.
>>
>> For myself, each of the Fructose activities, each of the activities we
>> ship on OLPC OS.  I know Walter is looking after Music Blocks.  Lionel
>> is looking after Sugarizer.  Are there any other developers who are
>> maintainers?
>>
>> --
>> James Cameron
>> http://quozl.netrek.org/
>> ___
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
> ___
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>


-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org

___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-20 Thread Tony Anderson

While it is marvelous to see some actual attention to the Sugar 
activities, this approach is the direct opposite of the logic behind the 
move of the activities to gitHub. This is a return to the G1G1 model in 
which individuals develop, contribute and own activities. There can be 
no abandoned or orphaned activities in a community support model.

It was recognized by Walter and others that there were two factors which 
made that ownership model unworkable. First, changes in Sugar software 
support such as the move to GTK3 made common changes to all activities 
necessary and, second, that many of the original contributors are no 
longer involved with Sugar.

GitHub was touted as the way in which Sugar Labs as a community would 
support Sugar and its library of activities. However, in practice 
support for activities has become increasingly limited to a small number 
of ones selected for inclusion in the 13.2 series of builds.

The Sugar activities library is made available to our users via ASLO. 
Unfortunately, there are activities with new versions in gitHub which 
have not been released to ASLO and thus are unknown to our users. There 
is even confusion over which 'github'. It has to be kept clear that 
developers can use any method they chose. What is controlled is the 
repository on gitHub. Any changes outside of the Sugar Labs github are 
invisible until they are submitted as a new version.

*
*
*Educational intent*

What I would like to see is a return to the founding philosophy of 
Sugar. Everyone is welcome to contribute. When you get 10 lines of code 
working, submit your activity. Sugar is designed to provide all the 
software tools needed to develop activities in Sugar - no 
cross-development, containers, or virtual environments. Instead of 
requesting new contributors to demonstrate their technical proficiency 
by putting their name on the XO icon in the Home View, identify some 
real examples of changes that would improve Sugar. There are plenty 
available:

Fix the icons on 'my settings' so they are visible instead of switching 
to gnome by clicking on the big toe.
When you take a screenshot and switch to the Journal to give it a title, 
you must use the Frame to return, not the Activity key.
The kids love the ability to customize their laptop with a background 
picture. Unfortunately this often makes the icons in the Home View 
invisible.
Add Jupyter Notebook as a built-in capability of Sugar (possibly as a 
service of Browse).
Help solve problems with a long list of activities (such as the lack of 
sound in Block Party).

Find a way for Browse to support the css FlexBox.

Stop using Pippy as a ceiling to our users learning to program in 
Python. They can work up to 'Make your own Sugar Activities'.  Start 
with the Hello World activity. Explain GTK and its benefits. PyDebug 
provides recipes for many common coding situations. Stop hiding the 
Terminal and Log activities - try to encourage them to become favorites. 
Soon we could see a new generation of user-programmers as we did in 
Uruguay.

Along this theme, we should embrace the RPI and its compatriots as a way 
to make embedded computing tangible. It would not be difficult to 
connect such a device via the Ad Hoc network so that it could be used to 
transfer a program written on an XO to the device and execute it with 
the user seeing the results on LEDs (e.g. Sense Hat).

Tony

On 1/20/19 3:48 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
I noticed Dimensions fell off the list. I will take that one on as I 
think it is of real value.

-walter

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 8:44 AM James Cameron > wrote:

Thanks. So the list looks like;

# Walter Bender

* Music Blocks,
* Turtle Blocks JS,

# Rahul Bothra

* CowBulls,
* Flappy,
* Cedit,
* Polari,

# James Cameron

* Abacus,
* Browse (master),
* Browse (fedora 18 - webkit - v157.x),
* Calculator,
* Chart,
* Chat,
* Clock,
* Develop,
* Distance,
* Finance,
* Find Words,
* Fototoon,
* Fraction Bounce,
* Gears,
* GetBooks,
* Help,
* ImageViewer,
* Implode,
* Jukebox,
* Labyrinth,
* Letters,
* Log,
* Maze,
* Measure,
* Memorize,
* Moon (master),
* Moon (fedora 18 - gtk2 - v17.x),
* MusicKeyboard (master),
* MusicKeyboard (fedora 18 - csound - v8.x),
* Paint,
* Physics,
* Pippy,
* Poll,
* Portfolio,
* Read (master),
* Read (fedora 18 - webkit - v118.x),
* Record (master),
* Record (fedora 18 - gstreamer - v10x),
* SimpleEnglishWikipedia,
* Speak,
* StopWatch,
* Story,
* Terminal,
* TurtleBlocks,
* Words,
* Write,

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 09:04:50AM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> I am actively maintaining Music Blocks and Turtle Blocks JS.
> I just haven't had the bandwidth to do much beyond that of late.
That said, I
> am happy to kibbutz on any o

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-21 Thread James Cameron

Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still hasn't happened
because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't the
time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to GitHub.

In short, it has nothing to do with the tools, and everything to do
with contributors.

I'll continue to focus on the activities I've got on my list.  That
doesn't mean I won't help with the other activities, but I won't
necessarily spend as much time with the others.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:12:01AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> While it is marvelous to see some actual attention to the Sugar activities,
> this approach is the direct opposite of the logic behind the move of the
> activities to gitHub. This is a return to the G1G1 model in which individuals
> develop, contribute and own activities. There can be no abandoned or orphaned
> activities in a community support model.
> 
> It was recognized by Walter and others that there were two factors which made
> that ownership model unworkable. First, changes in Sugar software support such
> as the move to GTK3 made common changes to all activities necessary and,
> second, that many of the original contributors are no longer involved with
> Sugar.
> 
> GitHub was touted as the way in which Sugar Labs as a community would support
> Sugar and its library of activities. However, in practice support for
> activities has become increasingly limited to a small number of ones selected
> for inclusion in the 13.2 series of builds.
> 
> The Sugar activities library is made available to our users via ASLO.
> Unfortunately, there are activities with new versions in gitHub which have not
> been released to ASLO and thus are unknown to our users. There is even
> confusion over which 'github'. It has to be kept clear that developers can use
> any method they chose. What is controlled is the repository on gitHub. Any
> changes outside of the Sugar Labs github are invisible until they are 
> submitted
> as a new version.
> 
> Educational intent
> 
> What I would like to see is a return to the founding philosophy of Sugar.
> Everyone is welcome to contribute. When you get 10 lines of code working,
> submit your activity. Sugar is designed to provide all the software tools
> needed to develop activities in Sugar - no cross-development, containers, or
> virtual environments. Instead of requesting new contributors to demonstrate
> their technical proficiency by putting their name on the XO icon in the Home
> View, identify some real examples of changes that would improve Sugar. There
> are plenty available:
> 
> Fix the icons on 'my settings' so they are visible instead of switching to
> gnome by clicking on the big toe.
> When you take a screenshot and switch to the Journal to give it a title, you
> must use the Frame to return, not the Activity key.
> The kids love the ability to customize their laptop with a background picture.
> Unfortunately this often makes the icons in the Home View invisible.
> Add Jupyter Notebook as a built-in capability of Sugar (possibly as a service
> of Browse).
> Help solve problems with a long list of activities (such as the lack of sound
> in Block Party).
> Find a way for Browse to support the css FlexBox.
> 
> Stop using Pippy as a ceiling to our users learning to program in Python. They
> can work up to 'Make your own Sugar Activities'.  Start with the Hello World
> activity. Explain GTK and its benefits. PyDebug provides recipes for many
> common coding situations. Stop hiding the Terminal and Log activities - try to
> encourage them to become favorites. Soon we could see a new generation of
> user-programmers as we did in Uruguay.
> 
> Along this theme, we should embrace the RPI and its compatriots as a way to
> make embedded computing tangible. It would not be difficult to connect such a
> device via the Ad Hoc network so that it could be used to transfer a program
> written on an XO to the device and execute it with the user seeing the results
> on LEDs (e.g. Sense Hat).
> 
> Tony
> 
> On 1/20/19 3:48 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> 
> I noticed Dimensions fell off the list. I will take that one on as I think
> it is of real value.
> 
> -walter
> 
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 8:44 AM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:
> 
> Thanks.  So the list looks like;
> 
> # Walter Bender
> 
> * Music Blocks,
> * Turtle Blocks JS,
> 
> # Rahul Bothra
> 
> * CowBulls,
> * Flappy,
> * Cedit,
> * Polari,
> 
> # James Cameron
> 
> * Abacus,
> * Browse (master),
> * Browse (fedora 18 - webkit - v157.x),
> * Calculator,
> * Chart,
> * Chat,
> * Clock,
> * Develop,
> * Distance,
> * Finance,
> * Find Words,
> * Fototoon,
> * F

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-21 Thread Tony Anderson


Hi, James

This is a disagreement with Walter from day one. ASLO is a means to 
maintain the library of Sugar activities in use for nearly a decade. 
Introducing gitHub created an obstacle for our users as contributors. 
Another disagreement I have with Walter is the concept of replacing 
ASLO. This has been tried more than once without meeting the test of 
providing something better. The reasns I mentioned were the ones Walter 
offered in justification of the change.


Gitorious was not a part of the conversation because it was never part 
of the ASLO process. You may remember my faux pas in trying to assist in 
the transition  to gitHub. As I see the process proposed by Walter, each 
activity on ASLO, should have a corresponding repository on Sugar Labs 
gitHub. Contributors should submit new versions of activities as Pull 
Requests. These submissions should be reviewed and tested by Sugar users 
before release. When released, the new versions should be put on ASLO 
for use by our community. There is nothing in this process that requires 
(or should require) a contributor to use gitHub, gitorious or, indeed, 
any version control system. The version control comes through the 
submission process. Certainly, no developer should develop on SugarLabs 
github. It should only see Pull Requests reflecting new versions. 
Naturally this process is essentially different from that which applies 
to Sugar development.


Tony


On 1/21/19 10:44 AM, James Cameron wrote:

Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still hasn't happened
because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't the
time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to GitHub.

In short, it has nothing to do with the tools, and everything to do
with contributors.

I'll continue to focus on the activities I've got on my list.  That
doesn't mean I won't help with the other activities, but I won't
necessarily spend as much time with the others.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:12:01AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:

While it is marvelous to see some actual attention to the Sugar activities,
this approach is the direct opposite of the logic behind the move of the
activities to gitHub. This is a return to the G1G1 model in which individuals
develop, contribute and own activities. There can be no abandoned or orphaned
activities in a community support model.

It was recognized by Walter and others that there were two factors which made
that ownership model unworkable. First, changes in Sugar software support such
as the move to GTK3 made common changes to all activities necessary and,
second, that many of the original contributors are no longer involved with
Sugar.

GitHub was touted as the way in which Sugar Labs as a community would support
Sugar and its library of activities. However, in practice support for
activities has become increasingly limited to a small number of ones selected
for inclusion in the 13.2 series of builds.

The Sugar activities library is made available to our users via ASLO.
Unfortunately, there are activities with new versions in gitHub which have not
been released to ASLO and thus are unknown to our users. There is even
confusion over which 'github'. It has to be kept clear that developers can use
any method they chose. What is controlled is the repository on gitHub. Any
changes outside of the Sugar Labs github are invisible until they are submitted
as a new version.

Educational intent

What I would like to see is a return to the founding philosophy of Sugar.
Everyone is welcome to contribute. When you get 10 lines of code working,
submit your activity. Sugar is designed to provide all the software tools
needed to develop activities in Sugar - no cross-development, containers, or
virtual environments. Instead of requesting new contributors to demonstrate
their technical proficiency by putting their name on the XO icon in the Home
View, identify some real examples of changes that would improve Sugar. There
are plenty available:

Fix the icons on 'my settings' so they are visible instead of switching to
gnome by clicking on the big toe.
When you take a screenshot and switch to the Journal to give it a title, you
must use the Frame to return, not the Activity key.
The kids love the ability to customize their laptop with a background picture.
Unfortunately this often makes the icons in the Home View invisible.
Add Jupyter Notebook as a built-in capability of Sugar (possibly as a service
of Browse).
Help solve problems with a long list of activities (such as the lack of sound
in Block Party).
Find a way for Browse to support the css FlexBox.

Stop using Pippy as a ceiling to our users learning to program in Python. They
can work up to 'Make your own Sugar Activities'.  Start with the Hello World
activity. Explain GTK and its benefits. PyDebug provides recipes for many
common coding s

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-21 Thread Walter Bender

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron  wrote:

> Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
> achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
> gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still hasn't happened
> because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't the
> time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to GitHub.
>
>
I would be curious what is still on Gitorious that hasn't been migrated.

FWIW, my principle motivations for the move were (1) as James points out --
on less piece of infrastructure for us to maintain; and (2) GitHub for
better or worse is much more familiar to and likely to be discovered by
potential developers. I think GH has been a decent tool which requires
minimal effort on our part. Not sure that the latter really amounts to too
much.

Re Tony's point about the ownership model, I don't see that anything we are
doing suggests we don't want to continue to support individual
contributions. I interpreted James's list not as a matter of ownership but
rather a surfacing of what is actually happening re maintenance. In some
sense, what is being articulated is the equivalent of the Fructose vs Honey
nomenclature of the past where the core developers are saying: "These
activities will be maintained. Cannot speak for everything else."

That said, I think Tony makes a great point re thinking about the
pedagogical implications of our choices, which have had little if any input
from the learning side of the house. Would be great to get more input to
help us in regard to what is most valuable to our users (whether they know
it or not). @Tony Anderson  would be great if you
could rework you thoughts about Python into a GSoC idea.

regards.

-walter


> In short, it has nothing to do with the tools, and everything to do
> with contributors.
>
> I'll continue to focus on the activities I've got on my list.  That
> doesn't mean I won't help with the other activities, but I won't
> necessarily spend as much time with the others.
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:12:01AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> > While it is marvelous to see some actual attention to the Sugar
> activities,
> > this approach is the direct opposite of the logic behind the move of the
> > activities to gitHub. This is a return to the G1G1 model in which
> individuals
> > develop, contribute and own activities. There can be no abandoned or
> orphaned
> > activities in a community support model.
> >
> > It was recognized by Walter and others that there were two factors which
> made
> > that ownership model unworkable. First, changes in Sugar software
> support such
> > as the move to GTK3 made common changes to all activities necessary and,
> > second, that many of the original contributors are no longer involved
> with
> > Sugar.
> >
> > GitHub was touted as the way in which Sugar Labs as a community would
> support
> > Sugar and its library of activities. However, in practice support for
> > activities has become increasingly limited to a small number of ones
> selected
> > for inclusion in the 13.2 series of builds.
> >
> > The Sugar activities library is made available to our users via ASLO.
> > Unfortunately, there are activities with new versions in gitHub which
> have not
> > been released to ASLO and thus are unknown to our users. There is even
> > confusion over which 'github'. It has to be kept clear that developers
> can use
> > any method they chose. What is controlled is the repository on gitHub.
> Any
> > changes outside of the Sugar Labs github are invisible until they are
> submitted
> > as a new version.
> >
> > Educational intent
> >
> > What I would like to see is a return to the founding philosophy of Sugar.
> > Everyone is welcome to contribute. When you get 10 lines of code working,
> > submit your activity. Sugar is designed to provide all the software tools
> > needed to develop activities in Sugar - no cross-development,
> containers, or
> > virtual environments. Instead of requesting new contributors to
> demonstrate
> > their technical proficiency by putting their name on the XO icon in the
> Home
> > View, identify some real examples of changes that would improve Sugar.
> There
> > are plenty available:
> >
> > Fix the icons on 'my settings' so they are visible instead of switching
> to
> > gnome by clicking on the big toe.
> > When you take a screenshot and switch to the Journal to give it a title,
> you
> > must use the Frame to return, not the Activity key.
> > The kids love the ability to customize their laptop with a background
> picture.
> > Unfortunately this often makes the icons in the Home View invisible.
> > Add Jupyter Notebook as a built-in capability of Sugar (possibly as a
> service
> > of Browse).
> > Help solve problems with a long list of activities (such as the lack of
> sound
> > in Block Party).
> > Find a way for Browse to support the css FlexBox.
> >
> > Stop using Pippy as a ceiling to our users learning t

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-21 Thread Tony Anderson

Walter,

I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it then. 
My principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with manageable scope 
- many of the past projects ended undelivered.

Tony

On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron > wrote:

Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org
. Which still hasn't happened
because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't the
time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to GitHub.

I would be curious what is still on Gitorious that hasn't been migrated.

FWIW, my principle motivations for the move were (1) as James points 
out -- on less piece of infrastructure for us to maintain; and (2) 
GitHub for better or worse is much more familiar to and likely to be 
discovered by potential developers. I think GH has been a decent tool 
which requires minimal effort on our part. Not sure that the latter 
really amounts to too much.

Re Tony's point about the ownership model, I don't see that anything 
we are doing suggests we don't want to continue to support individual 
contributions. I interpreted James's list not as a matter of ownership 
but rather a surfacing of what is actually happening re maintenance. 
In some sense, what is being articulated is the equivalent of the 
Fructose vs Honey nomenclature of the past where the core developers 
are saying: "These activities will be maintained. Cannot speak for 
everything else."

That said, I think Tony makes a great point re thinking about the 
pedagogical implications of our choices, which have had little if any 
input from the learning side of the house. Would be great to get more 
input to help us in regard to what is most valuable to our users 
(whether they know it or not). @Tony Anderson 
 would be great if you could rework you 
thoughts about Python into a GSoC idea.

regards.

-walter

In short, it has nothing to do with the tools, and everything to do
with contributors.

I'll continue to focus on the activities I've got on my list.  That
doesn't mean I won't help with the other activities, but I won't
necessarily spend as much time with the others.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:12:01AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> While it is marvelous to see some actual attention to the Sugar
activities,
> this approach is the direct opposite of the logic behind the
move of the
> activities to gitHub. This is a return to the G1G1 model in
which individuals
> develop, contribute and own activities. There can be no
abandoned or orphaned
> activities in a community support model.
>
> It was recognized by Walter and others that there were two
factors which made
> that ownership model unworkable. First, changes in Sugar
software support such
> as the move to GTK3 made common changes to all activities
necessary and,
> second, that many of the original contributors are no longer
involved with
> Sugar.
>
> GitHub was touted as the way in which Sugar Labs as a community
would support
> Sugar and its library of activities. However, in practice
support for
> activities has become increasingly limited to a small number of
ones selected
> for inclusion in the 13.2 series of builds.
>
> The Sugar activities library is made available to our users via
ASLO.
> Unfortunately, there are activities with new versions in gitHub
which have not
> been released to ASLO and thus are unknown to our users. There
is even
> confusion over which 'github'. It has to be kept clear that
developers can use
> any method they chose. What is controlled is the repository on
gitHub. Any
> changes outside of the Sugar Labs github are invisible until
they are submitted
> as a new version.
>
> Educational intent
>
> What I would like to see is a return to the founding philosophy
of Sugar.
> Everyone is welcome to contribute. When you get 10 lines of code
working,
> submit your activity. Sugar is designed to provide all the
software tools
> needed to develop activities in Sugar - no cross-development,
containers, or
> virtual environments. Instead of requesting new contributors to
demonstrate
> their technical proficiency by putting their name on the XO icon
in the Home
> View, identify some real examples of changes that would improve
Sugar. There
> are plenty available:
>
> Fix the icons on 'my settings' so they are visible instead of
switching to
> gnome by clicking on the big toe.
> When you take a screenshot and switch to the Journal to give it
a title, you
>

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-22 Thread Devin Ulibarri

Hi,
This was my experience:
 * I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration was 
beginning to happen.
 * I started a GH account because that is where I was told the software was 
being maintained.
 * I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I have come 
to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
These are my thoughts and opinions:
 * I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is where all 
the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many kids (usually 
GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute to SL (and to 
participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are willing to join 
our development regardless of whatever tools/services we use, and whatever 
tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with them, they are willing to 
get setup in order to join development.
 * Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more productive using GH 
because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own code hosting 
service". Is there evidence that we are more productive now than before? Not 
having the opportunity to learn/use the other systems, I would only be guessing.
 * In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like it would be 
a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a learning 
opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the ways in which we 
would like to do development.
 * I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS license than 
a proprietary license. gnu.org came up with some criteria to evaluate "code 
hosting services" such as GH: https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.html 
(which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) The whole reason I am in this in 
the first place is because I believe the free/libre model of software to be the 
best for society and education. 
Devin
On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 07:15 +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> Walter, 
> 
> I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it
> then. My principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with
> manageable scope - many of the past projects ended undelivered.
> 
> Tony
> 
> On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron 
> > wrote:
> > > Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
> > > achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the
> > > unmaintained
> > > gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still hasn't
> > > happened
> > > because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't
> > > the
> > > time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to GitHub.
> > > 
> > > 
> > I would be curious what is still on Gitorious that hasn't been
> > migrated.
> > 
> > FWIW, my principle motivations for the move were (1) as James
> > points out -- on less piece of infrastructure for us to maintain;
> > and (2) GitHub for better or worse is much more familiar to and
> > likely to be discovered by potential developers. I think GH has
> > been a decent tool which requires minimal effort on our part. Not
> > sure that the latter really amounts to too much.
> > 
> > Re Tony's point about the ownership model, I don't see that
> > anything we are doing suggests we don't want to continue to support
> > individual contributions. I interpreted James's list not as a
> > matter of ownership but rather a surfacing of what is actually
> > happening re maintenance. In some sense, what is being articulated
> > is the equivalent of the Fructose vs Honey nomenclature of the past
> > where the core developers are saying: "These activities will be
> > maintained. Cannot speak for everything else."
> > 
> > That said, I think Tony makes a great point re thinking about the
> > pedagogical implications of our choices, which have had little if
> > any input from the learning side of the house. Would be great to
> > get more input to help us in regard to what is most valuable to our
> > users (whether they know it or not). @Tony Anderson would be great
> > if you could rework you thoughts about Python into a GSoC idea.
> > 
> > regards.
> > 
> > -walter
> >  
> > > In short, it has nothing to do with the tools, and everything to
> > > do
> > > with contributors.
> > > 
> > > I'll continue to focus on the activities I've got on my list. 
> > > That
> > > doesn't mean I won't help with the other activities, but I won't
> > > necessarily spend as much time with the others.
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:12:01AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> > > > While it is marvelous to see some actual attention to the Sugar
> > > activities,
> > > > this approach is the direct opposite of the logic behind the
> > > move of the
> > > > activities to gitHub. This is a return to the G1G1 model in
> > > which individuals
> > > > develop, contribute and own activities. There can be no
> > > abandoned or orphaned
> > > > activities in a community support model.
> >

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-22 Thread James Cameron

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This was my experience:
> 
>   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration was
> beginning to happen.
>   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the software was
> being maintained.
>   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I have 
> come
> to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
> 
> These are my thoughts and opinions:
> 
>   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is where all
> the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many kids
> (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute to SL 
> (and
> to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are willing 
> to
> join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we use, and
> whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with them, they
> are willing to get setup in order to join development.
>   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more productive using 
> GH
> because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own code
> hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more productive now than
> before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other systems, I would
> only be guessing.

Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
and issue integration, but less productive through loss of situational
awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
repositories.

>   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like it would 
> be
> a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a learning
> opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the ways in which
> we would like to do development.

git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and is
probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
patched.

bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally worked
well.

>   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS license
> than a proprietary license. gnu.org came up with some criteria to evaluate
> "code hosting services" such as GH: [1]https://www.gnu.org/software/
> repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) The whole
> reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe the free/libre
> model of software to be the best for society and education. 

Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done, but we
would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we could
use GitLab directly as other projects have done.

> 
> Devin
> 
> On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 07:15 +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> 
> Walter,
> 
> I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it then. 
> My
> principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with manageable scope -
> many of the past projects ended undelivered.
> 
> Tony
> 
> On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron <[2]qu...@laptop.org>
> wrote:
> 
> Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
> achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
> gitorious instance at [3]git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still hasn't
> happened
> because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't
> the
> time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to GitHub.
> 
> I would be curious what is still on Gitorious that hasn't been
> migrated.
> 
> FWIW, my principle motivations for the move were (1) as James points
> out -- on less piece of infrastructure for us to maintain; and (2)
> GitHub for better or worse is much more familiar to and likely to be
> discovered by potential developers. I think GH has been a decent tool
> which requires minimal effort on our part. Not sure that the latter
> really amounts to too much.
> 
> Re Tony's point about the ownership model, I don't see that anything 
> we
> are doing suggests we don't want to continue to support individual
> contributions. I interpreted James's list not as a matter of ownership
> but rather a surfacing of what is actually happening re maintenance. 
> In
> some sense, what is being articulated is the equivalent of the 
> Fructose
> vs Honey nomenclature of the past where the core developers are 
> saying:
> "These activities will be maintained. Cannot speak for everything
> else."
> 
> That said, I think Tony makes a great point re thinking

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-22 Thread Walter Bender

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron  wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This was my experience:
> >
> >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration was
> > beginning to happen.
> >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the software
> was
> > being maintained.
> >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I
> have come
> > to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
> >
> > These are my thoughts and opinions:
> >
> >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is
> where all
> > the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many kids
> > (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute to
> SL (and
> > to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are
> willing to
> > join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we use,
> and
> > whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with them,
> they
> > are willing to get setup in order to join development.
> >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more productive
> using GH
> > because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own
> code
> > hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more productive now
> than
> > before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other systems, I
> would
> > only be guessing.
>
> Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
> good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
> and issue integration, but less productive through loss of situational
> awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
> sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
> repositories.
>
> >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like it
> would be
> > a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a
> learning
> > opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the ways in
> which
> > we would like to do development.
>
> git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and is
> probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
> patched.
>
> bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally worked
> well.
>

The spam issue made it almost unusable.

>
> >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS
> license
> > than a proprietary license. gnu.org came up with some criteria to
> evaluate
> > "code hosting services" such as GH: [1]https://www.gnu.org/software/
> > repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) The
> whole
> > reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe the
> free/libre
> > model of software to be the best for society and education.
>
> Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done, but we
> would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we could
> use GitLab directly as other projects have done.
>

What does that accomplish at this point? (That being said, I use GitLab for
other projects and it works just fine.)

>
> >
> > Devin
> >
> > On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 07:15 +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> >
> > Walter,
> >
> > I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it
> then. My
> > principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with manageable
> scope -
> > many of the past projects ended undelivered.
> >
> > Tony
> >
> > On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron <[2]
> qu...@laptop.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever
> going to
> > achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the
> unmaintained
> > gitorious instance at [3]git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still
> hasn't
> > happened
> > because it is still useful, in turn because this community
> hasn't
> > the
> > time to do the necessary leg work to finish the move to
> GitHub.
> >
> > I would be curious what is still on Gitorious that hasn't been
> > migrated.
> >
> > FWIW, my principle motivations for the move were (1) as James
> points
> > out -- on less piece of infrastructure for us to maintain; and
> (2)
> > GitHub for better or worse is much more familiar to and likely
> to be
> > discovered by potential developers. I think GH has been a decent
> tool
> > which requires minimal effort on our part. Not sure that the
> latter
> > really amounts to too much.
> >
> > Re Tony's point about the ownership model, I don't see that
> anything we
> > are doing suggests we don't want to continue to support
> individual
> > contributions. I interpreted James's list not as a mat

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-22 Thread James Cameron

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This was my experience:
> >
> >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration was
> >     beginning to happen.
> >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the software
> was
> >     being maintained.
> >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I
> have come
> >     to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
> >
> > These are my thoughts and opinions:
> >
> >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is
> where all
> >     the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many 
> kids
> >     (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute to
> SL (and
> >     to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are
> willing to
> >     join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we use,
> and
> >     whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with them,
> they
> >     are willing to get setup in order to join development.
> >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more productive
> using GH
> >     because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own
> code
> >     hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more productive now
> than
> >     before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other systems, I
> would
> >     only be guessing.
> 
> Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
> good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
> and issue integration, but less productive through loss of situational
> awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
> sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
> repositories.
> 
> >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like it
> would be
> >     a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a
> learning
> >     opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the ways in
> which
> >     we would like to do development.
> 
> [2]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and is
> probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
> patched.
> 
> [3]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally worked
> well.
> 
> The spam issue made it almost unusable. 
> 
> >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS
> license
> >     than a proprietary license. [4]gnu.org came up with some criteria to
> evaluate
> >     "code hosting services" such as GH: [1][5]https://www.gnu.org/
> software/
> >     repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) The
> whole
> >     reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe the 
> free/
> libre
> >     model of software to be the best for society and education.
> 
> Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done, but we
> would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we could
> use GitLab directly as other projects have done.
> 
> What does that accomplish at this point? (That being said, I use GitLab for
> other projects and it works just fine.)

All I can think of is closer compliance with intent of FSA 2(b), that
any and all software and documentation distributed by the Project will
be distributed solely as Free Software.  But I've not heard from the
Conservancy on this.

I don't think there are any other things that would be accomplished,
so it's not something I'm inclined to ask about.

But I acknowledge Devin's concern; I too would rather be using
software that is licensed FLOSS than what we currently do.

> 
> >
> > Devin
> >
> > On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 07:15 +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> >
> >     Walter,
> >
> >     I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it
> then. My
> >     principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with manageable 
> scope
> -
> >     many of the past projects ended undelivered.
> >
> >     Tony
> >
> >     On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> >
> >         On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron <[2][6]
> qu...@laptop.org>
> >         wrote:
> >
> >             Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever
> going to
> >             achieve all that.  It was to enable a shutdown of the
> unmaintained
> >             gitorious instance at [3][7]git.sugarlabs.org.  Which still
> hasn't
> >

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-22 Thread Tony Anderson

My original point was that as a community we should view the activities 
on ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be 
either abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. 
When a change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the 
problem should be resolved as soon as possible.

Tony

On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:

 On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > This was my experience:
 >
 >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration was
 >     beginning to happen.
 >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the software
 was
 >     being maintained.
 >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I
 have come
 >     to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
 >
 > These are my thoughts and opinions:
 >
 >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is
 where all
 >     the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many kids
 >     (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute to
 SL (and
 >     to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are
 willing to
 >     join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we use,
 and
 >     whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with them,
 they
 >     are willing to get setup in order to join development.
 >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more productive
 using GH
 >     because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own
 code
 >     hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more productive now
 than
 >     before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other systems, I
 would
 >     only be guessing.

 Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
 good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
 and issue integration, but less productive through loss of situational
 awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
 sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
 repositories.

 >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like it
 would be
 >     a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a
 learning
 >     opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the ways in
 which
 >     we would like to do development.

 [2]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and is
 probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
 patched.

 [3]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally worked
 well.

The spam issue made it almost unusable.

 >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS
 license
 >     than a proprietary license. [4]gnu.org came up with some criteria to
 evaluate
 >     "code hosting services" such as GH: [1][5]https://www.gnu.org/
 software/
 >     repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) The
 whole
 >     reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe the free/
 libre
 >     model of software to be the best for society and education.

 Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done, but we
 would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we could
 use GitLab directly as other projects have done.

What does that accomplish at this point? (That being said, I use GitLab for
other projects and it works just fine.)

All I can think of is closer compliance with intent of FSA 2(b), that
any and all software and documentation distributed by the Project will
be distributed solely as Free Software.  But I've not heard from the
Conservancy on this.

I don't think there are any other things that would be accomplished,
so it's not something I'm inclined to ask about.

But I acknowledge Devin's concern; I too would rather be using
software that is licensed FLOSS than what we currently do.

 >
 > Devin
 >
 > On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 07:15 +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
 >
 >     Walter,
 >
 >     I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it
 then. My
 >     principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with manageable scope
 -
 >     many of the past projects ended undelivered.
 >
 >     Tony
 >
 >     On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
 >
 >         On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron <[2][6]
 qu...@laptop.org>
 >         wrote:
 >
 >             Fascinating, I

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-22 Thread James Cameron

Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.

We just don't have enough people paying attention.

How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
$95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> My original point was that as a community we should view the activities on
> ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be either
> abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. When a
> change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the problem
> should be resolved as soon as possible.
> 
> Tony
> 
> On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:
> >On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > This was my experience:
> >> >
> >> >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration 
> >> was
> >> >     beginning to happen.
> >> >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the 
> >> software
> >> was
> >> >     being maintained.
> >> >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I
> >> have come
> >> >     to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
> >> >
> >> > These are my thoughts and opinions:
> >> >
> >> >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is
> >> where all
> >> >     the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many 
> >> kids
> >> >     (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute 
> >> to
> >> SL (and
> >> >     to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are
> >> willing to
> >> >     join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we 
> >> use,
> >> and
> >> >     whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with 
> >> them,
> >> they
> >> >     are willing to get setup in order to join development.
> >> >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more 
> >> productive
> >> using GH
> >> >     because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own
> >> code
> >> >     hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more productive 
> >> now
> >> than
> >> >     before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other 
> >> systems, I
> >> would
> >> >     only be guessing.
> >>
> >> Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
> >> good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
> >> and issue integration, but less productive through loss of situational
> >> awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
> >> sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
> >> repositories.
> >>
> >> >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like 
> >> it
> >> would be
> >> >     a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a
> >> learning
> >> >     opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the 
> >> ways in
> >> which
> >> >     we would like to do development.
> >>
> >> [2]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and is
> >> probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
> >> patched.
> >>
> >> [3]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally 
> >> worked
> >> well.
> >>
> >>The spam issue made it almost unusable.
> >>
> >> >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS
> >> license
> >> >     than a proprietary license. [4]gnu.org came up with some 
> >> criteria to
> >> evaluate
> >> >     "code hosting services" such as GH: [1][5]https://www.gnu.org/
> >> software/
> >> >     repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) 
> >> The
> >> whole
> >> >     reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe the 
> >> free/
> >> libre
> >> >     model of software to be the best for society and education.
> >>
> >> Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done, but we
> >> would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we could
> >> use GitLab directly as other projects have done.
> >>
> >>What does that accomplish at this point? (That being said, I use GitLab for
> >>other projects and it works just fine.)
> >All I can think of is closer compliance with intent of FSA 2(b), that
> >any and all software and documentation distributed by the Project will
> >be distributed solely as Free Software.  But I've not heard from the

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-23 Thread Tony Anderson

My naive view is that if we seriously undertake the task, others will join.

As an example, now that we have Sugar on Ubuntu 18.04, we could easily 
install every activity on a laptop and test in Sugar by launching to see 
if it shows the opening screen or gives 'failed to start'. In the latter 
case, the Log activity can show the immediate cause of failure. In 
almost every case, the activity did run but has died of software rust.

Tony

On 1/23/19 8:15 AM, James Cameron wrote:

Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.

We just don't have enough people paying attention.

How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
$95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:

My original point was that as a community we should view the activities on
ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be either
abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. When a
change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the problem
should be resolved as soon as possible.

Tony

On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> wrote:

 On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > This was my experience:
 >
 >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this migration was
 >     beginning to happen.
 >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the software
 was
 >     being maintained.
 >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH although I
 have come
 >     to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
 >
 > These are my thoughts and opinions:
 >
 >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that is
 where all
 >     the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so many kids
 >     (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to contribute to
 SL (and
 >     to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people are
 willing to
 >     join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we use,
 and
 >     whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with them,
 they
 >     are willing to get setup in order to join development.
 >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more productive
 using GH
 >     because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our own
 code
 >     hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more productive now
 than
 >     before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other systems, I
 would
 >     only be guessing.

 Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
 good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
 and issue integration, but less productive through loss of situational
 awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
 sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
 repositories.

 >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me like it
 would be
 >     a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a
 learning
 >     opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the ways in
 which
 >     we would like to do development.

 [2]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and is
 probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
 patched.

 [3]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally worked
 well.

The spam issue made it almost unusable.

 >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a FLOSS
 license
 >     than a proprietary license. [4]gnu.org came up with some criteria to
 evaluate
 >     "code hosting services" such as GH: [1][5]https://www.gnu.org/
 software/
 >     repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest grade) The
 whole
 >     reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe the free/
 libre
 >     model of software to be the best for society and education.

 Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done, but we
 would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we could
 use GitLab directly as other projects have done.

What does that accomplish at this point? (That being said, I use GitLab for
other projects and it works just fine.)

All I can think of is closer compliance with intent of FSA 2(b), that
any and all software and documentation distributed by the Project will
be distributed solely as

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-23 Thread Dave Crossland

James, are you soliciting SL pay you as a contractor to fix Activities not
on the list?

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 1:15 AM James Cameron  Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
> happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.
>
> We just don't have enough people paying attention.
>
> How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
> $95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
> accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> > My original point was that as a community we should view the activities
> on
> > ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be either
> > abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. When a
> > change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the problem
> > should be resolved as soon as possible.
> >
> > Tony
> >
> > On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:
> > >On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> > >>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> > This was my experience:
> > >> >
> > >> >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this
> migration was
> > >> > beginning to happen.
> > >> >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the
> software
> > >> was
> > >> > being maintained.
> > >> >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH
> although I
> > >> have come
> > >> > to understand more of the history and context of this
> matter.
> > >> >
> > >> > These are my thoughts and opinions:
> > >> >
> > >> >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is
> "that is
> > >> where all
> > >> > the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so
> many kids
> > >> > (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to
> contribute to
> > >> SL (and
> > >> > to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many
> people are
> > >> willing to
> > >> > join our development regardless of whatever tools/services
> we use,
> > >> and
> > >> > whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup
> with them,
> > >> they
> > >> > are willing to get setup in order to join development.
> > >> >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more
> productive
> > >> using GH
> > >> > because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining
> our own
> > >> code
> > >> > hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more
> productive now
> > >> than
> > >> > before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other
> systems, I
> > >> would
> > >> > only be guessing.
> > >>
> > >> Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
> > >> good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull
> request
> > >> and issue integration, but less productive through loss of
> situational
> > >> awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted
> to
> > >> sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
> > >> repositories.
> > >>
> > >> >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me
> like it
> > >> would be
> > >> > a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b)
> a
> > >> learning
> > >> > opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to
> the ways in
> > >> which
> > >> > we would like to do development.
> > >>
> > >> [2]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance,
> and is
> > >> probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
> > >> patched.
> > >>
> > >> [3]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have
> generally worked
> > >> well.
> > >>
> > >>The spam issue made it almost unusable.
> > >>
> > >> >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a
> FLOSS
> > >> license
> > >> > than a proprietary license. [4]gnu.org came up with some
> criteria to
> > >> evaluate
> > >> > "code hosting services" such as GH: [1][5]
> https://www.gnu.org/
> > >> software/
> > >> > repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest
> grade) The
> > >> whole
> > >> > reason I am in this in the first place is because I believe
> the free/
> > >> libre
> > >> > model of software to be the best for society and education.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, I agree.  Setting up an instance of GitLab could be done,
> but we
> > >> would need someone willing to do that and maintain it.  Or we
> could
> > >> use GitLab directly as other projects have done.
> > >>
> > >>What does that accomplish at this po

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-23 Thread Martin Dengler

First, what are the numbers: extrapolating from this N=1 sample, how many 
activities can be maintained by a very experienced python and Sugar developer? 

Regards
Martin

> On Jan 23, 2019, at 07:27, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> 
> James, are you soliciting SL pay you as a contractor to fix Activities not on 
> the list?
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 1:15 AM James Cameron > Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
>> happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.
>> 
>> We just don't have enough people paying attention.
>> 
>> How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
>> $95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
>> accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.
>> 
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
>> > My original point was that as a community we should view the activities on
>> > ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be either
>> > abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. When a
>> > change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the problem
>> > should be resolved as soon as possible.
>> > 
>> > Tony
>> > 
>> > On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:
>> > >On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
>> > >>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org> 
>> > >>wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
>> > >> > Hi,
>> > >> >
>> > >> > This was my experience:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this 
>> > >> migration was
>> > >> > beginning to happen.
>> > >> >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the 
>> > >> software
>> > >> was
>> > >> > being maintained.
>> > >> >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH 
>> > >> although I
>> > >> have come
>> > >> > to understand more of the history and context of this matter.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > These are my thoughts and opinions:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is "that 
>> > >> is
>> > >> where all
>> > >> > the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so 
>> > >> many kids
>> > >> > (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to 
>> > >> contribute to
>> > >> SL (and
>> > >> > to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people 
>> > >> are
>> > >> willing to
>> > >> > join our development regardless of whatever tools/services we 
>> > >> use,
>> > >> and
>> > >> > whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup with 
>> > >> them,
>> > >> they
>> > >> > are willing to get setup in order to join development.
>> > >> >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more 
>> > >> productive
>> > >> using GH
>> > >> > because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining our 
>> > >> own
>> > >> code
>> > >> > hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more 
>> > >> productive now
>> > >> than
>> > >> > before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other 
>> > >> systems, I
>> > >> would
>> > >> > only be guessing.
>> > >>
>> > >> Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
>> > >> good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull request
>> > >> and issue integration, but less productive through loss of 
>> > >> situational
>> > >> awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted to
>> > >> sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
>> > >> repositories.
>> > >>
>> > >> >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me 
>> > >> like it
>> > >> would be
>> > >> > a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b) a
>> > >> learning
>> > >> > opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the 
>> > >> ways in
>> > >> which
>> > >> > we would like to do development.
>> > >>
>> > >> [2]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance, and 
>> > >> is
>> > >> probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't been
>> > >> patched.
>> > >>
>> > >> [3]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have generally 
>> > >> worked
>> > >> well.
>> > >>
>> > >>The spam issue made it almost unusable.
>> > >>
>> > >> >   • I would rather be using software that is licensed under a 
>> > >> FLOSS
>> > >> license
>> > >> > than a proprietary license. [4]gnu.org came up with some 
>> > >> criteria to
>> > >> evaluate
>> > >> > "code hosting services" such as GH: [1][5]https://www.gnu.org/
>> > >> software/
>> > >> > repo-criteria.html (which, btw, gets an "F", the lowest 
>> > >> grade) The
>> > >>

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-23 Thread James Cameron

No, thanks!  What my time can accomplish was given only as an
indication of the size of the solved part of the overall problem.

OLPC continues to pay me to work on our education solution, which
includes Sugar and these activities.  The rest of my time is already
sold.

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 07:27:56AM -0500, Dave Crossland wrote:
> James, are you soliciting SL pay you as a contractor to fix Activities not on
> the list?
> 
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 1:15 AM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org wrote:
> 
> Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
> happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.
> 
> We just don't have enough people paying attention.
> 
> How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
> $95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
> accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> > My original point was that as a community we should view the activities
> on
> > ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be 
> either
> > abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. When a
> > change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the problem
> > should be resolved as soon as possible.
> >
> > Tony
> >
> > On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:
> > >On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> > >>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1][2]qu...@laptop.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>     On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
> > >>     > Hi,
> > >>     >
> > >>     > This was my experience:
> > >>     >
> > >>     >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this
> migration was
> > >>     >     beginning to happen.
> > >>     >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the
> software
> > >>     was
> > >>     >     being maintained.
> > >>     >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH
> although I
> > >>     have come
> > >>     >     to understand more of the history and context of this
> matter.
> > >>     >
> > >>     > These are my thoughts and opinions:
> > >>     >
> > >>     >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is
> "that is
> > >>     where all
> > >>     >     the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so
> many kids
> > >>     >     (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to
> contribute to
> > >>     SL (and
> > >>     >     to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many 
> people
> are
> > >>     willing to
> > >>     >     join our development regardless of whatever tools/services
> we use,
> > >>     and
> > >>     >     whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup
> with them,
> > >>     they
> > >>     >     are willing to get setup in order to join development.
> > >>     >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more
> productive
> > >>     using GH
> > >>     >     because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining
> our own
> > >>     code
> > >>     >     hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more
> productive now
> > >>     than
> > >>     >     before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other
> systems, I
> > >>     would
> > >>     >     only be guessing.
> > >>
> > >>     Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you 
> get
> > >>     good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull
> request
> > >>     and issue integration, but less productive through loss of
> situational
> > >>     awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted
> to
> > >>     sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
> > >>     repositories.
> > >>
> > >>     >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me
> like it
> > >>     would be
> > >>     >     a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b)
> a
> > >>     learning
> > >>     >     opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to 
> the
> ways in
> > >>     which
> > >>     >     we would like to do development.
> > >>
> > >>     [2][3]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant 
> maintenance,
> and is
> > >>     probably insecure now because of vulnerabilities that haven't 
> been
> > >>     patched.
> > >>
> > >>     [3][4]bugs.sugarlabs.org has needed updates, but they have
> generally worked
> > >>     well.
> > >>
> > >>The spam issue made it almost unusable.
> > >>
> > >>     >   • I would rather be using software t

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-23 Thread Dave Crossland

Thanks for clarifying; I'd misunderstood 😂

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 7:29 PM James Cameron  No, thanks!  What my time can accomplish was given only as an
> indication of the size of the solved part of the overall problem.
>
> OLPC continues to pay me to work on our education solution, which
> includes Sugar and these activities.  The rest of my time is already
> sold.
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 07:27:56AM -0500, Dave Crossland wrote:
> > James, are you soliciting SL pay you as a contractor to fix Activities
> not on
> > the list?
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 1:15 AM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org wrote:
> >
> > Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
> > happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.
> >
> > We just don't have enough people paying attention.
> >
> > How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
> > $95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
> > accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> > > My original point was that as a community we should view the
> activities
> > on
> > > ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be
> either
> > > abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community.
> When a
> > > change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the
> problem
> > > should be resolved as soon as possible.
> > >
> > > Tony
> > >
> > > On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:
> > > >On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> > > >>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1][2]
> qu...@laptop.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri
> wrote:
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > This was my experience:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this
> > migration was
> > > >> > beginning to happen.
> > > >> >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was
> told the
> > software
> > > >> was
> > > >> > being maintained.
> > > >> >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH
> > although I
> > > >> have come
> > > >> > to understand more of the history and context of this
> > matter.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > These are my thoughts and opinions:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH
> is
> > "that is
> > > >> where all
> > > >> > the developers are", but since our migration I have
> seen so
> > many kids
> > > >> > (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to
> > contribute to
> > > >> SL (and
> > > >> > to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many
> people
> > are
> > > >> willing to
> > > >> > join our development regardless of whatever
> tools/services
> > we use,
> > > >> and
> > > >> > whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet
> setup
> > with them,
> > > >> they
> > > >> > are willing to get setup in order to join development.
> > > >> >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be
> more
> > productive
> > > >> using GH
> > > >> > because we need not worry about the hassle of
> maintaining
> > our own
> > > >> code
> > > >> > hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more
> > productive now
> > > >> than
> > > >> > before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the
> other
> > systems, I
> > > >> would
> > > >> > only be guessing.
> > > >>
> > > >> Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling,
> you get
> > > >> good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull
> > request
> > > >> and issue integration, but less productive through loss of
> > situational
> > > >> awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being
> posted
> > to
> > > >> sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
> > > >> repositories.
> > > >>
> > > >> >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems
> to me
> > like it
> > > >> would be
> > > >> > a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of
> work, b)
> > a
> > > >> learning
> > > >> > opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility
> to the
> > ways in
> > > >> which
> > > >> > we would like to do development.
> > > >>
> > > >> [2][3]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant
> maintenance,
> > and is
> > > >> probably insec

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

2019-01-23 Thread Tony Anderson

Naturally, the key is volunteer activity by the community. As always 
identify the non-working activities, identify common problems which can 
be handled such as conversion to GTK3, and anyone who wants take that 
on. For testers and reviewers, get help from out users. If we set up a 
'help' path to our users, we might start getting input on the problems 
they have encountered.


Tony



On 1/24/19 2:28 AM, James Cameron wrote:

No, thanks!  What my time can accomplish was given only as an
indication of the size of the solved part of the overall problem.

OLPC continues to pay me to work on our education solution, which
includes Sugar and these activities.  The rest of my time is already
sold.

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 07:27:56AM -0500, Dave Crossland wrote:

James, are you soliciting SL pay you as a contractor to fix Activities not on
the list?

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 1:15 AM James Cameron <[1]qu...@laptop.org wrote:

 Nice idea, but hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it to ever
 happen without scaling up the number of testers and fixers.

 We just don't have enough people paying attention.

 How would you propose that attention be purchased?  Sugar Labs has
 $95k we could spend.  You've seen from the list what my time can
 accomplish each year, and that's not 100% of my time.

 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 08:03:16AM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
 > My original point was that as a community we should view the activities
 on
 > ASLO as a corpus to be treasured and protected. No activity can be either
 > abandoned or orphaned. It is the responsibility of the community. When a
 > change 'upstream' breaks an activity or set of activities, the problem
 > should be resolved as soon as possible.
 >
 > Tony
 >
 > On 1/23/19 6:07 AM, James Cameron wrote:
 > >On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 09:54:08PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
 > >>On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 9:13 PM James Cameron <[1][2]qu...@laptop.org>
 wrote:
 > >>
 > >>     On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:29:56PM -0500, Devin Ulibarri wrote:
 > >>     > Hi,
 > >>     >
 > >>     > This was my experience:
 > >>     >
 > >>     >   • I came into SugarLabs community at the time that this
 migration was
 > >>     >     beginning to happen.
 > >>     >   • I started a GH account because that is where I was told the
 software
 > >>     was
 > >>     >     being maintained.
 > >>     >   • I have continued to "go with the flow" and work via GH
 although I
 > >>     have come
 > >>     >     to understand more of the history and context of this
 matter.
 > >>     >
 > >>     > These are my thoughts and opinions:
 > >>     >
 > >>     >   • I remember an argument that one reason to move to GH is
 "that is
 > >>     where all
 > >>     >     the developers are", but since our migration I have seen so
 many kids
 > >>     >     (usually GCI) set up new accounts with GH in order to
 contribute to
 > >>     SL (and
 > >>     >     to participate in GCI). This makes me think that many people
 are
 > >>     willing to
 > >>     >     join our development regardless of whatever tools/services
 we use,
 > >>     and
 > >>     >     whatever tool/services we use, if they are not yet setup
 with them,
 > >>     they
 > >>     >     are willing to get setup in order to join development.
 > >>     >   • Another argument seems to boil down to "we will be more
 productive
 > >>     using GH
 > >>     >     because we need not worry about the hassle of maintaining
 our own
 > >>     code
 > >>     >     hosting service". Is there evidence that we are more
 productive now
 > >>     than
 > >>     >     before? Not having the opportunity to learn/use the other
 systems, I
 > >>     would
 > >>     >     only be guessing.
 > >>
 > >>     Not much evidence, it's about the same.  Like any tooling, you get
 > >>     good at it with time.  More productive now through the pull
 request
 > >>     and issue integration, but less productive through loss of
 situational
 > >>     awareness; changes are hidden in GitHub rather than being posted
 to
 > >>     sugar-devel@, and new developers fixate on their favourite
 > >>     repositories.
 > >>
 > >>     >   • In theory, SL running its own version control, seems to me
 like it
 > >>     would be
 > >>     >     a) more fun for someone interested in this kind of work, b)
 a
 > >>     learning
 > >>     >     opportunity, and c) gives maximum freedom/flexibility to the
 ways in
 > >>     which
 > >>     >     we would like to do development.
 > >>
 > >>     [2][3]git.sugarlabs.org hasn't needed any significant maintenance,
 and is
 > >>     probably insecure now because of vulnerabili

[Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] Abandoned or orphaned activities

22 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information