On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On Friday, 28 September 2012, Walter Bender wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Gonzalo Odiard
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure what problem we are trying to solve. If I give you any
>> >> release number > than the latest gtk2
On Friday, 28 September 2012, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Gonzalo Odiard
> >
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am not sure what problem we are trying to solve. If I give you any
> >> release number > than the latest gtk2 version, won't that solve your
> >> problem? And if I label t
On Friday, 28 September 2012, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Peter Robinson
> >
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Daniel Narvaez
> > >
> wrote:
> >> On 26 September 2012 16:02, Walter Bender
> >> >
> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Narva
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Gonzalo Odiard
> wrote:
> > My point is reach a agreement in _one_ criteria if possible.
> > The only activity needing a bigger number probably is Turtle (can start
> form
> > 200?)
> > Read and Browse are a
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
> My point is reach a agreement in _one_ criteria if possible.
> The only activity needing a bigger number probably is Turtle (can start form
> 200?)
> Read and Browse are already ported to gtk3 and do not have development in
> gtk2.
I shoul
My point is reach a agreement in _one_ criteria if possible.
The only activity needing a bigger number probably is Turtle (can start
form 200?)
Read and Browse are already ported to gtk3 and do not have development in
gtk2.
Gonzalo
> I don't agree re 100+ simply because some activities already
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
>>
>> I am not sure what problem we are trying to solve. If I give you any
>> release number > than the latest gtk2 version, won't that solve your
>> problem? And if I label that release with 0.96+ in ASLO, won't that
>> resolve itself re old
>
>
> I am not sure what problem we are trying to solve. If I give you any
> release number > than the latest gtk2 version, won't that solve your
> problem? And if I label that release with 0.96+ in ASLO, won't that
> resolve itself re old Sugar systems? I think the solution may lie in
> simply not
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
>> On 26 September 2012 16:02, Walter Bender wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
On 26 September 2012 15:40, Walter Bender wrote:
> Hmm. 100 is
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 16:02, Walter Bender wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
>>> On 26 September 2012 15:40, Walter Bender wrote:
Hmm. 100 is not large enough, whereas I am already up to Turtle Blocks
>
Oh, I haven't seen anything dealing with rpms in the updater code
(maybe it's olpc only?).
On 26 September 2012 17:18, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
> How will map the version number to rpms?
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Daniel Narvaez
> wrote:
>>
>> On 26 September 2012 15:52, Go
On 26 September 2012 16:02, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
>> On 26 September 2012 15:40, Walter Bender wrote:
>>> Hmm. 100 is not large enough, whereas I am already up to Turtle Blocks v160
>>> :P
>>> But I don't know why even/odd is any less obvi
How will map the version number to rpms?
Gonzalo
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 15:52, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
> > Doesn't solve the problem.
> > You will have bigger version numbers with the gtk2 version than the gtk3
> > version.
>
> We could hack
On 26 September 2012 15:52, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
> Doesn't solve the problem.
> You will have bigger version numbers with the gtk2 version than the gtk3
> version.
We could hack aslo to turn version x into 0.x for platform versions <
0.98. If I'm not missing something there is no real handling o
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 15:40, Walter Bender wrote:
>> Hmm. 100 is not large enough, whereas I am already up to Turtle Blocks v160
>> :P
>> But I don't know why even/odd is any less obvious than >< 100.
>> I am not sure how to proceed.
>
> Ma
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 15:40, Walter Bender wrote:
> > Hmm. 100 is not large enough, whereas I am already up to Turtle Blocks
> v160 :P
> > But I don't know why even/odd is any less obvious than >< 100.
> > I am not sure how to proceed.
>
>
>
> >> I've been using even numbers for gtk2 and odd numbers for gtk3 since
> >> the dotted number scheme doesn't work on all versions of Sugar.
>
Probably even and odd numbers will not work for users.
If they update, will receive a gtk2 version, and after that a gtk3, and so,
right?
Dotted versi
On 26 September 2012 15:40, Walter Bender wrote:
> Hmm. 100 is not large enough, whereas I am already up to Turtle Blocks v160 :P
> But I don't know why even/odd is any less obvious than >< 100.
> I am not sure how to proceed.
Maybe start using dotted numbers for the gtk3 version only?
__
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Walter Bender
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
On 26 September 2012 09:28, Peter Robinson wrote:
> It
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Walter Bender
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
>>> On 26 September 2012 09:28, Peter Robinson wrote:
It worked fine in v35, the only change was to bump the spec vers
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
>> On 26 September 2012 09:28, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>> It worked fine in v35, the only change was to bump the spec version,
>>> also there's other Activities that I built fine at the
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 09:28, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> It worked fine in v35, the only change was to bump the spec version,
>> also there's other Activities that I built fine at the same time.
>
> It looks like v35 uses gtk3, v36 uses gtk2. T
On 26 September 2012 09:28, Peter Robinson wrote:
> It worked fine in v35, the only change was to bump the spec version,
> also there's other Activities that I built fine at the same time.
It looks like v35 uses gtk3, v36 uses gtk2. The spec depends on
sugar-toolkit-gtk3 so v36 fails.
___
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there a dependency on sugar-toolkit in the spec? It doesn't seem to find
> the sugar.activity module.
It worked fine in v35, the only change was to bump the spec version,
also there's other Activities that I built fine at the sam
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Walter Bender wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> Hi Walter,
>>
>> I'm seeing issues building this as an rpm, there are the logs
>> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6308/4526308/build.log
>
> Strange. Seems to be related
Hi,
is there a dependency on sugar-toolkit in the spec? It doesn't seem to find
the sugar.activity module.
On Wednesday, 26 September 2012, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi Walter,
>
> I'm seeing issues building this as an rpm, there are the logs
> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6308/45
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Hi Walter,
>
> I'm seeing issues building this as an rpm, there are the logs
> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6308/4526308/build.log
Strange. Seems to be related somehow to ./setup.py build but I have no
problems running that
Hi Walter,
I'm seeing issues building this as an rpm, there are the logs
http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6308/4526308/build.log
Peter
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Sugar Labs Activities
wrote:
> Activity Homepage:
> http://activities.sugarlabs.org/addon/4293
>
> Sugar Platform
Activity Homepage:
http://activities.sugarlabs.org/addon/4293
Sugar Platform:
0.82 - 0.98
Download Now:
http://activities.sugarlabs.org/downloads/file/28230/abacus-36.xo
Release notes:
36
ENHANCEMENT
* New translations
* summary string in activity.info
Sugar Labs Activities
http://activities.
29 matches
Mail list logo
