Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
I realize that this is not merely a whishlist, but I would like to see added to the SoaS all other packages that are also present in the OLPC 12.1 build. I noticed just recently (because i haven't been using my XO for a while) that the standard OLPC build has the gnome (and desktop switcher) and several applications for it installed allong with the Sugar envirment. It basically adds more packages, and I understand that it makes it harder to maintain, but it seems to me that it would be good to have the same enviroment for the SoaS as for the OLPC desktop. This was probably discussed before, but i would think that providing the same enviroment could help spread Sugar to a regular more wider audience of i686 (or x86_64) bit desktop or notebook/netbook owners. Cheers 2013/3/22 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. Peter ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas -- Rodolfo D. Arce S. http://people.sugarlabs.org/~rolf ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Rodolfo D. Arce S. r...@sugarlabs.org wrote: I realize that this is not merely a whishlist, but I would like to see added to the SoaS all other packages that are also present in the OLPC 12.1 build. I noticed just recently (because i haven't been using my XO for a while) that the standard OLPC build has the gnome (and desktop switcher) and several applications for it installed allong with the Sugar envirment. I'm working as I get the time, along with Kalpa, to get the Sugar Activities to the same list as OLPC ships. The biggest missing ones at the moment is the Tam Tam suite. We're not going to ever ship the gnome desktop as part of the SoaS spin, but there's nothing to stop people installing it side by side with SoaS if you install it to hard disk. It basically adds more packages, and I understand that it makes it harder to maintain, but it seems to me that it would be good to have the same enviroment for the SoaS as for the OLPC desktop. From the sugar side of things we are basically the same. The distro is based on the same package set and being derived from Fedora there's nothing to stop you from installing gnome if it's what you want to do, we don't have the resources to provide the support for it out of the box. This was probably discussed before, but i would think that providing the same enviroment could help spread Sugar to a regular more wider audience of i686 (or x86_64) bit desktop or notebook/netbook owners. From the sugar side of things we are basically providing the same environment. There's a few minor differences but not much. If there's a particular sugar feature you feel is missing please let me know. GNOME is not a missing feature... it's intended. Peter Cheers 2013/3/22 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. Peter ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas -- Rodolfo D. Arce S. http://people.sugarlabs.org/~rolf ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
Hi Rodolfo and all... Long ago, in a very early version of SoaS, I seem to recall that Tam Tam was included. However, it did not work well as each operating system had its own way of making sounds on ttam he computer. I remember it being very poor quality on the Mac. If they could overcome this problem, it would be wonderful to include Tam Tam. I hope that will someday be possible. Caryl Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:33:56 + From: pbrobin...@gmail.com To: s...@lists.sugarlabs.org CC: sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org Subject: Re: [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9 On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Rodolfo D. Arce S. r...@sugarlabs.org wrote: I realize that this is not merely a whishlist, but I would like to see added to the SoaS all other packages that are also present in the OLPC 12.1 build. I noticed just recently (because i haven't been using my XO for a while) that the standard OLPC build has the gnome (and desktop switcher) and several applications for it installed allong with the Sugar envirment. I'm working as I get the time, along with Kalpa, to get the Sugar Activities to the same list as OLPC ships. The biggest missing ones at the moment is the Tam Tam suite. We're not going to ever ship the gnome desktop as part of the SoaS spin, but there's nothing to stop people installing it side by side with SoaS if you install it to hard disk. It basically adds more packages, and I understand that it makes it harder to maintain, but it seems to me that it would be good to have the same enviroment for the SoaS as for the OLPC desktop. From the sugar side of things we are basically the same. The distro is based on the same package set and being derived from Fedora there's nothing to stop you from installing gnome if it's what you want to do, we don't have the resources to provide the support for it out of the box. This was probably discussed before, but i would think that providing the same enviroment could help spread Sugar to a regular more wider audience of i686 (or x86_64) bit desktop or notebook/netbook owners. From the sugar side of things we are basically providing the same environment. There's a few minor differences but not much. If there's a particular sugar feature you feel is missing please let me know. GNOME is not a missing feature... it's intended. Peter Cheers 2013/3/22 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. Peter ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas -- Rodolfo D. Arce S. http://people.sugarlabs.org/~rolf ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
Hello: V9 will be based on fedora 19? I'm downloading the latest (which i think would be for fedora 18) I'll be testing both during the weekend. Something in particular that you would like for me to tes or just Activities (that sounded like it was easy and fast, but i know it is not :-) cheers 2013/3/22 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ Regards, Peter ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas -- Rodolfo D. Arce S. http://people.sugarlabs.org/~rolf ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Rodolfo D. Arce S. r...@sugarlabs.org wrote: Hello: V9 will be based on fedora 19? I'm downloading the latest (which i think would be for fedora 18) Yes, it will be based on Fedora 19. I'll be testing both during the weekend. Something in particular that you would like for me to tes or just Activities (that sounded like it was easy and fast, but i know it is not :-) For the development, Activities, the use case you would want to use SoaS in, pretty much everything. Peter cheers 2013/3/22 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ Regards, Peter ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas -- Rodolfo D. Arce S. http://people.sugarlabs.org/~rolf ___ SoaS mailing list s...@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
On Fri, March 22, 2013 12:19 pm, Peter Robinson wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. Where can we find these plans? I see that the SoaS pages on the Sugar Labs Wiki are seriously out of date, referring to Version 7 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Soas Version 4 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick_QA Release 1 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Running_Linux_Applications_Under_Sugar No version number given, but dated 2010 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Team/Testing V5 for MacBook, Version 7 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads The Fedora Spins page doesn't say what version of SoaS it is offering at all. http://spins.fedoraproject.org/soas/ Also, the Wiki fails to document release 0.98. It is out, according to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.98/Roadmap But it is not listed for any platform at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads#Do_you_use_GNU.2FLinux.3F Separately from that, the Sweets repository for Ubuntu doesn't seem to exist. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution/Manual_Installation Nor does the Ubuntu Sugar Team page. I would take that up with the Ubuntu Sugar Team if I could find it. ^_^ Sugar on Ubuntu is severely broken. Most activities fail to start. None of it should have been released in that state. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Packaging lists this page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SugarTeam which the Wiki says does not and has never existed. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would be delighted to help. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Who in particular? Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? If I had the information, I would be glad to add it to the Wiki on the appropriate pages. I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. +1 for Raspberry-Pi :) It won't be for Raspberry Pi. The armv5tel was dropped for Fedora 19. It will be supportable but that's through a different effort that I've not got the time to be involved with. It will worth with around 20 odd ARM devices including a new soon to be announced device that will cost almost the same as a RPi and be a lot more powerful. Can we get a Wiki page listing them, or an external link, and can we talk about testing SoaS on them _all_? If I could get funded to buy one of each and set up a modest test station with proper storage, power, and work area and all relevant ARM SoaS versions actually on sticks, I might volunteer to do that in between writing OERs and recruiting others to do so. Peter -- Edward Mokurai (默雷/निशब्दगर्ज/نشبدگرج) Cherlin Silent Thunder is my name, and Children are my nation. The Cosmos is my dwelling place, the Truth my destination. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Replacing_Textbooks ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
I agree that it can be hard to find the present version of soas One reason v8 is not prominently displayed is that anaconda liveinst does not work for installation to a HD or USB See [4] for a work-around until this is fixed I am also listing the links for sweets-distribution-sugar 0.94 Tom Gilliard satellit here are some links: [1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick scroll down wiki page to f18 where link is listed [2] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/%CA%BB%C5%8Chelo_%CA%BBai Sugar on a Stick v8 ʻŌhelo ʻai has never been updated on the left sidebar of the wiki [3]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/Virtual_machines#Sugar_on_a_Stick_v8_.CA.BB.C5.8Chelo_.CA.BBai Importable VirtualBox appliance [4]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Fedora_18#Tutorial:_Make_a_SoaS.img_file_for_repeated_installs * Note*: The following are .img files are provided to workaround the bug that SoaS 8 fails to run a non-Live install to a hard disk or USB drive [5]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/Subpages has listings for older versions [6] http://download.sugarlabs.org/soas/releases/ Archive of oldest soas.iso files http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution/Manual_Installation http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Ubuntu http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Summer_of_Code/2013#Finish_work_on_Ubuntu_Sugar sweets-distribution: sugar 0.94 On 03/22/2013 02:09 PM, Edward Mokurai Cherlin wrote: On Fri, March 22, 2013 12:19 pm, Peter Robinson wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. Where can we find these plans? I see that the SoaS pages on the Sugar Labs Wiki are seriously out of date, referring to Version 7 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Soas Version 4 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick_QA Release 1 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Running_Linux_Applications_Under_Sugar No version number given, but dated 2010 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Team/Testing V5 for MacBook, Version 7 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads The Fedora Spins page doesn't say what version of SoaS it is offering at all. http://spins.fedoraproject.org/soas/ Also, the Wiki fails to document release 0.98. It is out, according to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.98/Roadmap But it is not listed for any platform at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads#Do_you_use_GNU.2FLinux.3F Separately from that, the Sweets repository for Ubuntu doesn't seem to exist. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution/Manual_Installation Nor does the Ubuntu Sugar Team page. I would take that up with the Ubuntu Sugar Team if I could find it. ^_^ Sugar on Ubuntu is severely broken. Most activities fail to start. None of it should have been released in that state. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Packaging lists this page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SugarTeam which the Wiki says does not and has never existed. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would be delighted to help. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Who in particular? Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? If I had the information, I would be glad to add it to the Wiki on the appropriate pages. I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. +1 for Raspberry-Pi :) It won't be for Raspberry Pi. The armv5tel was dropped for Fedora 19. It will be supportable but that's through a different effort that I've not got the time to be involved with. It will worth with around 20 odd
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
On 03/22/2013 02:09 PM, Edward Mokurai Cherlin wrote: On Fri, March 22, 2013 12:19 pm, Peter Robinson wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. Where can we find these plans? I see that the SoaS pages on the Sugar Labs Wiki are seriously out of date, referring to Version 7 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Soas Version 4 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick_QA Release 1 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Running_Linux_Applications_Under_Sugar No version number given, but dated 2010 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Team/Testing V5 for MacBook, Version 7 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads The Fedora Spins page doesn't say what version of SoaS it is offering at all. http://spins.fedoraproject.org/soas/ Also, the Wiki fails to document release 0.98. It is out, according to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.98/Roadmap But it is not listed for any platform at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads#Do_you_use_GNU.2FLinux.3F Separately from that, the Sweets repository for Ubuntu doesn't seem to exist. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution/Manual_Installation Nor does the Ubuntu Sugar Team page. I would take that up with the Ubuntu Sugar Team if I could find it. ^_^ Sugar on Ubuntu is severely broken. Most activities fail to start. None of it should have been released in that state. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Packaging lists this page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SugarTeam which the Wiki says does not and has never existed. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would be delighted to help. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Who in particular? Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? If I had the information, I would be glad to add it to the Wiki on the appropriate pages. I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. +1 for Raspberry-Pi :) It won't be for Raspberry Pi. The armv5tel was dropped for Fedora 19. It will be supportable but that's through a different effort that I've not got the time to be involved with. It will worth with around 20 odd ARM devices including a new soon to be announced device that will cost almost the same as a RPi and be a lot more powerful. Can we get a Wiki page listing them, or an external link, and can we talk about testing SoaS on them _all_? If I could get funded to buy one of each and set up a modest test station with proper storage, power, and work area and all relevant ARM SoaS versions actually on sticks, I might volunteer to do that in between writing OERs and recruiting others to do so. Sorry I missed this on the previous post- Here are wiki pages for the raspberry pi: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Testing/Reports/ARM_RPi#Test_report_rpfr-f18-final.img http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit/sck/Advanced_Topics#Raspberry_Pi_.2F_RPi ARM Overview: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit/sck/Advanced_Topics#ARM Tom Gilliard satellit Peter ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9
One more link to a wiki page I just updated: wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/previous_versions (Soas v1-Soas-v7 -download links) Tom Gilliard On 03/22/2013 03:26 PM, Thomas Gilliard wrote: I agree that it can be hard to find the present version of soas One reason v8 is not prominently displayed is that anaconda liveinst does not work for installation to a HD or USB See [4] for a work-around until this is fixed I am also listing the links for sweets-distribution-sugar 0.94 Tom Gilliard satellit here are some links: [1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick scroll down wiki page to f18 where link is listed [2] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/%CA%BB%C5%8Chelo_%CA%BBai Sugar on a Stick v8 ?O-helo ?ai has never been updated on the left sidebar of the wiki [3]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/Virtual_machines#Sugar_on_a_Stick_v8_.CA.BB.C5.8Chelo_.CA.BBai Importable VirtualBox appliance [4]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Fedora_18#Tutorial:_Make_a_SoaS.img_file_for_repeated_installs * Note*: The following are .img files are provided to workaround the bug that SoaS 8 fails to run a non-Live install to a hard disk or USB drive [5]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick/Subpages has listings for older versions [6] http://download.sugarlabs.org/soas/releases/ Archive of oldest soas.iso files http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution/Manual_Installation http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Ubuntu http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Summer_of_Code/2013#Finish_work_on_Ubuntu_Sugar sweets-distribution: sugar 0.94 On 03/22/2013 02:09 PM, Edward Mokurai Cherlin wrote: On Fri, March 22, 2013 12:19 pm, Peter Robinson wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Martin Abente martin.abente.lah...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Peter Robinsonpbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinsonpbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I have been over the last couple. The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish. Where can we find these plans? I see that the SoaS pages on the Sugar Labs Wiki are seriously out of date, referring to Version 7http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Soas Version 4http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_on_a_Stick_QA Release 1http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Running_Linux_Applications_Under_Sugar No version number given, but dated 2010 http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Team/Testing V5 for MacBook, Version 7http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads The Fedora Spins page doesn't say what version of SoaS it is offering at all. http://spins.fedoraproject.org/soas/ Also, the Wiki fails to document release 0.98. It is out, according to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.98/Roadmap But it is not listed for any platform at http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads#Do_you_use_GNU.2FLinux.3F Separately from that, the Sweets repository for Ubuntu doesn't seem to exist. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sweets_Distribution/Manual_Installation Nor does the Ubuntu Sugar Team page. I would take that up with the Ubuntu Sugar Team if I could find it. ^_^ Sugar on Ubuntu is severely broken. Most activities fail to start. None of it should have been released in that state. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Packaging lists this page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SugarTeam which the Wiki says does not and has never existed. I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev cycle so I don't get the My Activity is broken post release or five minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing them out to the Fedora mirrors. I would be delighted to help. I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so years. Who in particular? Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the process? If I had the information, I would be glad to add it to the Wiki on the appropriate pages. I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki. Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to mostly work. http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/ I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should arrive around F-19 Beta. +1 for Raspberry-Pi :) It won't be
