Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[anonym]

07/11/12 18:10, intrigeri wrote:
> Note for the one who manages the release: we need to make sure the
> final ISO does not get the latest live-config (3.0.9-1): it has
> basically nothing useful for us, and it migrates to new paths brought
> by live-boot 3.0~b7, which we're not ready for yet (details:
> todo/newer_live-boot).

I'll put live-config{-sysvinit} 3.0.8-1, both which worked well in
0.14~rc1 and ~rc2, in config/chroot_local-packages. Unless there is some
other suggestion (APT repo?).

Cheers!

___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[anonym]

06/11/12 15:49, intrigeri wrote:
> anonym wrote (30 Oct 2012 00:35:39 GMT) :
>> 
> 
> Regression: todo/fix_VirtualBox_modules_build_for_486
> 
> Weird, I was pretty sure I had tested this worked when submitting the
> multikernel feature for review.

IMHO this isn't a blocker (perhaps not even an issue at all?) for 0.14
since I doubt anyone wants to subject themselves to running Tails inside
a virtual machine on pre-pentium pro hardware.

Cheers!

___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] [tor-dev] Working on GUI

[anonym]

07/11/12 18:41, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Damian Johnson wrote (06 Nov 2012 23:31:02 GMT) :
>> Runa A. Sandvik wrote (06 Nov 2012 22:44:03 GMT) :
>>> Actually, both Tails and the Tor Browser Bundle could benefit from
>>> a usability study.
> 
> Thank you, Runa, for mentioning Tails here.

Seconded! Thank you!

>> Usability studies only help if there's development resources to make
>> the suggestions happen. Mike and Tails should be the ones to make
>> the call about if they have the bandwidth to take advantage of
>> a usability study or not.

The TBB usability study [1] mentioned by Greg Norcie in this thread is
quite interesting, even for Tails. It identifies several UX or
documentation failures in TBB that lead to "stop-points" (a point which
a given user cannot proceed beyond) that are also directly applicable to
Tails, or that have some more or less obvious parallel in Tails. Several
of these issues are similar to what Andrew observed in his Tails
usability study.

Cheers!

[1] http://petsymposium.org/2012/papers/hotpets12-1-usability.pdf
[2] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2012-April/003472.html

___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[Ague Mill]

anonym:
> 07/11/12 18:10, intrigeri wrote:
> > Note for the one who manages the release: we need to make sure the
> > final ISO does not get the latest live-config (3.0.9-1): it has
> > basically nothing useful for us, and it migrates to new paths brought
> > by live-boot 3.0~b7, which we're not ready for yet (details:
> > todo/newer_live-boot).
> 
> I'll put live-config{-sysvinit} 3.0.8-1, both which worked well in
> 0.14~rc1 and ~rc2, in config/chroot_local-packages. Unless there is some
> other suggestion (APT repo?).

Please use the APT repository from now on. Oh, and don't forget to
upload the source! :)

I intend to remove all packages in the Git repository for 0.15, so
let's just start the good habits now...

-- 
Ague


pgpzwVV4Hcloc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[anonym]

08/11/12 14:34, Ague Mill wrote:
> anonym:
>> 07/11/12 18:10, intrigeri wrote:
>>> Note for the one who manages the release: we need to make sure the
>>> final ISO does not get the latest live-config (3.0.9-1): it has
>>> basically nothing useful for us, and it migrates to new paths brought
>>> by live-boot 3.0~b7, which we're not ready for yet (details:
>>> todo/newer_live-boot).
>>
>> I'll put live-config{-sysvinit} 3.0.8-1, both which worked well in
>> 0.14~rc1 and ~rc2, in config/chroot_local-packages. Unless there is some
>> other suggestion (APT repo?).
> 
> Please use the APT repository from now on.

Ok. I wasn't sure if we felt we were ready for a full-scale move to this
yet.

> Oh, and don't forget to upload the source! :)

Sure thing.

> I intend to remove all packages in the Git repository for 0.15, so
> let's just start the good habits now...

What procedure do you suggest for packages that we don't build
ourselves, like live-config{-sysvinit}? The APT documentation [1] only
covers the case where packages are built and an appropriate .changes
file is generated.

Should I try to manually write a .changes file, e.g. by adapting the
upstream one, removing references to other packages like live-config-doc
etc.?

Or should I build the packages? What about all these irrelevant packages
(like live-config-doc) then? Upload them too?

Cheers!

[1] https://tails.boum.org/contribute/APT_repository

___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[Ague Mill]

anonym:
> What procedure do you suggest for packages that we don't build
> ourselves, like live-config{-sysvinit}? The APT documentation [1] only
> covers the case where packages are built and an appropriate .changes
> file is generated.
> 
> Should I try to manually write a .changes file, e.g. by adapting the
> upstream one, removing references to other packages like live-config-doc
> etc.?
> 
> Or should I build the packages? What about all these irrelevant packages
> (like live-config-doc) then? Upload them too?

The main difference of using our APT repository versus
`chroot_local-packages` is that packages in the former won't
automatically be installed. So there is no reason to exclude binary
packages. They might come in handy later (binary packages containing
debug symbols, for example).

You can write a .changes manually, but it might be easier to use the
changestool(1) command that is shipped in the reprepro package.
Rebuilding the package is another fine option unless the build
ecosystem has changed too much in the meantime.

If the whole thing feels complicated, just put it in
`chroot_local-packages` and we'll deal with the rest with 0.15.

-- 
Ague


pgp8J8VbB4se6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[intrigeri]

anonym wrote (08 Nov 2012 13:22:11 GMT) :
> IMHO this isn't a blocker (perhaps not even an issue at all?) for
> 0.14 since I doubt anyone wants to subject themselves to running
> Tails inside a virtual machine on pre-pentium pro hardware.

Agreed. I retagged the ticket "wishlist", as in "patches are welcome".
___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev

Re: [Tails-dev] Call for testing 0.14~rc2

[intrigeri]

anonym wrote (08 Nov 2012 13:22:00 GMT) :
> I'll put live-config{-sysvinit} 3.0.8-1, both which worked well in
> 0.14~rc1 and ~rc2, in config/chroot_local-packages. Unless there is
> some other suggestion (APT repo?).

Sure, APT repo would be a bit better, but given our oldish live-boot
is in config/chroot_local-packages, I would not mind putting
live-config with it for the sake of consistency.
___
tails-dev mailing list
tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev