Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
Sorry for the late answer, 2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). Thanks for the fix. I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel. From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it, it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very nice to have that automated. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
-1 Please don't remove the dev command. It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful. Gonzalo On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: Sorry for the late answer, 2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). Thanks for the fix. I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel. From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it, it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very nice to have that automated. -- .. manuq .. ___ 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] Bundlebuilder dev command
On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Manuel Quiñones wrote: I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel. From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it, it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very nice to have that automated. Hi, note that I'm not suggesting people should create a symlink, rather they should develop directly in the activities directory. All that they need to know is where that directory is, which is something that doesn't really seem avoidable to hack on sugar. The fact that activities doesn't need a build system, that you can just create a directory somewhere and start writing code, is one of the best aspects of the sugar design IMO and the dev command is hiding it behind a not very useful abstraction. -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
Fair enough, I'll let people which cares about gtk2 toolkit and the dev
command fix that bug :)
On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
-1
Please don't remove the dev command.
It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful.
Gonzalo
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones
ma...@laptop.orgjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'ma...@laptop.org');
wrote:
Sorry for the late answer,
2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'dwnarv...@gmail.com');:
Hello,
as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev
command
is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in
sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently).
Thanks for the fix.
I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop
directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside
sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway,
if
someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is,
the dev
command feels like unnecessary magic to me.
I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel.
From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the
other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar
to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it,
it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in
sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very
nice to have that automated.
--
.. manuq ..
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org');
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
--
Daniel Narvaez
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
It is only an issue for sugar-build, not Sugar installed by non-developers. And it is documented [1]. And ls -s sugar-build/activities Activities works. -walter [1] http://developer.sugarlabs.org/dev-environment.md.html#activities On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote: I people continue using ~/Activities directory is not a problem, right? What is the point of move the directory where the activities are installed? Changing these directories without a good motive _is_ a problem. Nobody will update the documentation, wiki pages, tutorials, and development book, then people will be confused. Gonzalo On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Fair enough, I'll let people which cares about gtk2 toolkit and the dev command fix that bug :) On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: -1 Please don't remove the dev command. It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful. Gonzalo On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.org wrote: Sorry for the late answer, 2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). Thanks for the fix. I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel. From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it, it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very nice to have that automated. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez -- 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] Bundlebuilder dev command
I people continue using ~/Activities directory is not a problem, right? What is the point of move the directory where the activities are installed? Changing these directories without a good motive _is_ a problem. Nobody will update the documentation, wiki pages, tutorials, and development book, then people will be confused. Gonzalo On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Fair enough, I'll let people which cares about gtk2 toolkit and the dev command fix that bug :) On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: -1 Please don't remove the dev command. It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful. Gonzalo On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.orgwrote: Sorry for the late answer, 2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). Thanks for the fix. I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel. From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it, it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very nice to have that automated. -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
Nothing changed in sugar itself, I just fixed obvious bugs, like
environment variables not being consistently respected, nonsense code
duplication etc.
About sugar-build, the change is necessary because you want everything to
be contained in the mounted directory (sugar-build), so that it's available
both inside and outside the chroot. That way you can easily hack on it
outside and run it inside. This is correctly documented on
developer.sugarlabs.org and, as far as I know, nowhere else.
On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
I people continue using ~/Activities directory is not a problem, right?
What is the point of move the directory where the activities are installed?
Changing these directories without a good motive _is_ a problem.
Nobody will update the documentation, wiki pages,
tutorials, and development book, then people will be confused.
Gonzalo
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Daniel Narvaez
dwnarv...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'dwnarv...@gmail.com');
wrote:
Fair enough, I'll let people which cares about gtk2 toolkit and the dev
command fix that bug :)
On Wednesday, 18 September 2013, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
-1
Please don't remove the dev command.
It works. If you don't use does not means other don't find it useful.
Gonzalo
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Manuel Quiñones ma...@laptop.orgwrote:
Sorry for the late answer,
2013/9/15 Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com:
Hello,
as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev
command
is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in
sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently).
Thanks for the fix.
I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to
develop
directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside
sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink
anyway, if
someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is,
the dev
command feels like unnecessary magic to me.
I'm so so with the idea of deprecating the dev command, Daniel.
From one side you are right, all it does is create a symlink. On the
other hand, is a symlink added in the exact place, in order for Sugar
to install your activity. As a user, I never had to worry about it,
it just works. As a comparison, the 'volo create' command we have in
sugar-web does simple operations as well (as we use it) but is very
nice to have that automated.
--
.. manuq ..
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
--
Daniel Narvaez
--
Daniel Narvaez
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
developers should be able to grok sugar-build/activities (as long as it is documented -- see PR-41). -walter On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. -- Daniel Narvaez -- 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] Bundlebuilder dev command
Link to the pull request? I don't see it in the sugarlabs/ list. On 15 September 2013 14:16, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: developers should be able to grok sugar-build/activities (as long as it is documented -- see PR-41). -walter On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. -- Daniel Narvaez -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Bundlebuilder dev command
https://github.com/sugarlabs/sugar-docs/pull/43 On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Link to the pull request? I don't see it in the sugarlabs/ list. On 15 September 2013 14:16, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote: developers should be able to grok sugar-build/activities (as long as it is documented -- see PR-41). -walter On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, as discussed in another thread, the sugar-toolkit bundlebuilder dev command is not respecting the SUGAR_ACTIVITIES_PATH (a fix for that landed in sugar-toolkit-gtk3 recently). I wonder if we should just drop the dev command, and suggest to develop directly in sugar-build/activities (or ~/Activities when outside sugar-build). All that the command does is to create a symlink anyway, if someone really wants they can do that themselves easily... As it is, the dev command feels like unnecessary magic to me. -- Daniel Narvaez -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org -- Daniel Narvaez -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
