Re: [Sugar-devel] webm woes

2015-06-18 Thread Gonzalo Odiard
Just for reference, we started to port Browse to WebKit2 on the webkit2 branch https://github.com/sugarlabs/browse-activity/tree/webkit2 If you want to test, is a option, but still need a lot of work until will be on par with the webkitgtk version. In particular, some api we need is not available

Re: [Sugar-devel] webm woes

2015-06-18 Thread Tim Moody
> > If you can't read HTML, drive wget, and host the files, find someone on XSCE > to help you? sure. > > -- > James Cameron > http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/

Re: [Sugar-devel] webm woes

2015-06-18 Thread James Cameron
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:27:51AM -0400, Tim Moody wrote: > > summary: you have a failing video _player_ app, not a failing > > _video_. > > OK. I thought maybe it was a variant mp4, but I see that you are > right. It is the browser support for the page not the codec. > > To be clear, I am using

Re: [Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread Gonzalo Odiard
I am afraid you will find many other activities where the license notation is in the same state. If the current maintainer can't solve the problem, I have nothing to do, but then don't complain :) Gonzalo On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:39 PM, James Cameron wrote: > I'm with Jonas on this. > > The fa

Re: [Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread James Cameron
I'm with Jonas on this. The fault is a copyright statement in a work without a license, and yes, only the original copyright owner can correct it. In my opinion, that correction can be a mail reply from the original copyright owner saying "Gonzalo, please add this license short text", or "Gonzalo

Re: [Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Hi Gonzalo, Quoting Gonzalo Odiard (2015-06-18 13:33:57) > In our project, is a common practice include a COPYING file in the > activity directory. > Include the text on every file does not have sense for us,  more > thinking we still support old devices with few storage space, as the > XO-1. >

Re: [Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread Gonzalo Odiard
In our project, is a common practice include a COPYING file in the activity directory. Include the text on every file does not have sense for us, more thinking we still support old devices with few storage space, as the XO-1. Could you clarify what are you asking for, specifically, please? In the n

Re: [Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Hi Martin (and cc others - also alternate address for Aneesh), Quoting Martin Abente (2015-06-18 12:58:48) > Thanks for taking the time to let us know. The new maintainer of > Calculate is Gonzalo (cc'ed). > > For future reference, you can check this [1] list to see who is > currently maintainin

Re: [Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread Martin Abente
Hello Jonas, Thanks for taking the time to let us know. The new maintainer of Calculate is Gonzalo (cc'ed). For future reference, you can check this [1] list to see who is currently maintaining an activity (we certainly need to improve our communication channels). Regards, Martin. [1] http://wi

[Sugar-devel] license of layout.py in Sugar Calculate activity

2015-06-18 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Hi Aneesh, I maintain Sugar packaging of Sugar for Debian, and noticed that in the Calculate activity you've declared copyright for layout.py but not included a license. Please always include an explicit license statement where a copyright is stated, because a lack of license statement does no

Re: [Sugar-devel] webm woes

2015-06-18 Thread Tim Moody
> -Original Message- > From: qu...@laptop.org [mailto:qu...@laptop.org] > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 2:48 AM > To: Tim Moody > Cc: 'Adam Holt'; sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > Subject: Re: webm woes > > summary: you have a failing video _player_ app, not a failing _video_. OK. I t