On 13 July 2010 06:17, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On 12 July 2010 19:27, James Cameron wrote:
>> I'm still unconvinced that this is worth changing, given the additional
>> work that it will cause.
>>
>> I'd like to hear from the heavy users of trac, in particular Chris (cjb),
>> Daniel (dsd), and Paul
> why would you want to know what tickets were closed
> as part of work toward a particular release?
Let me give an answer from the user's perspective (I'm seconding what
Martin's response said):
Consider build 800 versus build 802. Suppose I as an user had a problem
on build 767 which prevented
On 12 July 2010 19:27, James Cameron wrote:
> I'm still unconvinced that this is worth changing, given the additional
> work that it will cause.
>
> I'd like to hear from the heavy users of trac, in particular Chris (cjb),
> Daniel (dsd), and Paul (pgf).
I think our current system made sense temp
It may be worth looking at http://trac.edgewall.org/roadmap for how
the trac team itself uses it.
In particular, if you check the "Show completed milestones" box, and
then on some old milestone (like, say,
http://trac.edgewall.org/milestone/0.11.3 ) you can drill down into
any component and see wha
I'm still unconvinced that this is worth changing, given the additional
work that it will cause.
I'd like to hear from the heavy users of trac, in particular Chris (cjb),
Daniel (dsd), and Paul (pgf).
--
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/
___
Dev
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:37 PM, James Cameron wrote:
> Question back at you; why would you want to know what tickets were closed
> as part of work toward a particular release?
I regularly 'datamine' the SCM repos and bug/task-trackers of the
components I use. This is enormously important when ma
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 09:59:58AM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> Key question: How do we query 'tickets closed in 10.1.0'? How about in
> 10.1.1?
Can't. Not even if milestones were release version names. When tickets
are closed we do not capture a meaningful "closed as part of work toward
rele
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:08 PM, James Cameron wrote:
> You're asking me to rejustify decisions made in November 2009 when the
> environment was somewhat different.
I understand the situation was weird in Nov 2009. But that's behind
us, and I'd say we got to make good use of the tools we have...
You're asking me to rejustify decisions made in November 2009 when the
environment was somewhat different.
We had informal unpublished plans to release but we had no release name
chosen.
The change I made months ago was to facilitate testers and bug reporters
... to increase the data quality by r
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 8:45 PM, James Cameron wrote:
> Use 1.x-software-update for tickets you plan to have fixed for the next
> release. (Choose these tickets based on the intent of the release).
Ok.
That's not how Trac is designed to work, however. And not how most
(all minus olpc? ;-) ) use
On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 05:33:54PM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
> > XO-1.5:
> > ===
> >
> > We'll be continuing to work on XO-1.5 improvements, incorporating
> > fixes to the "Known Problems" section of the 10.1.1 release notes?
> > into the
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Andrew van der Stock
wrote:
> waiting for more dev boards to arrive
The SoC is similar to the Sheeva Plug so the CPU/platform porting can
be done on one of those.
Driver stuff is a different matter, of course -
m
--
martin.langh...@gmail.com
mar...@laptop.or
Hi Andrew,
> Hi Chris, Can we work on QEMU with the F12 / F13 ARM port to
> emulate user land of XO 1.75 and Sugar? I think that would be
> helpful to get things bootstrapped earlier than waiting for more
> dev boards to arrive if an emulation mechanism could be
> developed.
We can
Hi Chris,
Can we work on QEMU with the F12 / F13 ARM port to emulate user land of XO 1.75
and Sugar? I think that would be helpful to get things bootstrapped earlier
than waiting for more dev boards to arrive if an emulation mechanism could be
developed.
In terms of the PS/2 closed source cod
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
> XO-1.5:
> ===
>
> We'll be continuing to work on XO-1.5 improvements, incorporating
> fixes to the "Known Problems" section of the 10.1.1 release notes¹
> into the 10.1.2 release.
Chris, James,
can we rename the upcoming milestone to 10.1.2
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
> > What about the compiler? IIUC currently a commercial compiler is
> > required. If that continues to be the case (as I expect it to),
> > would it be possible for OLPC to provide the (probably very few)
> > users interested in hacking on
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 11:02 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> Congratulations on the excellent work done to date by you all and on
> the sound (and well communicated) plan.
I couldn't agree more.
On top of this, interaction between OLPC, the Fedora community and the
Sugar Labs community has been fant
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 00:01, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that the 10.1.1 release for XO-1.5 is out, it's a good time to
> talk about OLPC's software strategy for the future. We've got a few
> announcements to make:
>
> XO-1:
> =
>
> OLPC wasn't planning to make a Fedora 11 release of the
Hi Chris,
Well done to the team for all the hard work!
> Now that the 10.1.1 release for XO-1.5 is out, it's a good time to
> talk about OLPC's software strategy for the future. We've got a few
> announcements to make:
>
> XO-1:
> =
>
> OLPC wasn't planning to make a Fedora 11 release of the
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that the 10.1.1 release for XO-1.5 is out, it's a good time to
> talk about OLPC's software strategy for the future. We've got a few
> announcements to make:
>
> XO-1:
> =
>
> OLPC wasn't planning to make a Fedora 11 release of t
Massive kudos for everything :)
Keep up the great work and keep us up to date on those ARM developments.
Best regards,
Tiago
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that the 10.1.1 release for XO-1.5 is out, it's a good time to
> talk about OLPC's software strategy for
Chris,
thanks a lot for the extensive (and exciting!) updates and
information, much appreciated:-)
Cheers,
Christoph
Am 08.07.2010 um 00:01 schrieb Chris Ball :
> Hi,
>
> Now that the 10.1.1 release for XO-1.5 is out, it's a good time to
> talk about OLPC's software strategy for the future.
Hi,
Now that the 10.1.1 release for XO-1.5 is out, it's a good time to
talk about OLPC's software strategy for the future. We've got a few
announcements to make:
XO-1:
=
OLPC wasn't planning to make a Fedora 11 release of the XO-1 OS, but
a group of volunteers including Steven Parrish, Bern
23 matches
Mail list logo
