2013/3/14 Daniel Drake :
>
> For example, what happens if a user who is on a proxy-free network
> types "hello" into the proxy configuration textbox? Does that break
> all networking?
Yes, setting proxy mode to "Manual" then typing "hello" in the first
input breaks networking in the current implem
> I think proxy configuration should be an optional extension that is
> disabled by default, allowing a deployment to enable it.
>
>
We can add a configuration to allow deployments to disable it.
Gonzalo
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sug
Is it different from relying on a modem and having a wrong modem-config?
I think there are scenarios where "normal" includes the proper
proxy-config, otherwise browse won't work either.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 10:33 PM, James Cameron wrote:
> But with modem-config a child cannot stop normal ope
But with modem-config a child cannot stop normal operation.
With proxy, the child can stop normal operation, in that no Browse
will work with wrong proxy.
I think proxy configuration should be an optional extension that is
disabled by default, allowing a deployment to enable it.
On Thu, Mar 14,
I think this feature (proxy-config) is useful, just as the modem-config is,
which is included now.
dsd's brings a valid questioning of whether this kind of "technical"
features should be included or not. I think this particular matter requires
a broader discussion about how we could conciliate sug
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
> While I understand your point about the radio checkbox,
> this show a few bugs or fails in design in Sugar too.
> Trying right now I see:
> * The text is confusing:
> "Turn off the wireless radio to save battery life"
> [] Radio
>
> Checked
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Gonzalo Odiard
> wrote:
> > About the network proxy configuration, I agree is better have a automatic
> > configuration _if_possible_, but there are times when is not possible,
> > then we should provide a so
> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:35:26 -0600
> From: d...@laptop.org
> To: gonz...@laptop.org
> CC: alan...@hotmail.com; sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org;
> an...@activitycentral.com; alsr...@activitycentral.com
> Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURES][DESIGN] Network proxy configu
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
> About the network proxy configuration, I agree is better have a automatic
> configuration _if_possible_, but there are times when is not possible,
> then we should provide a solution. Has been a request for a long time,
> and the development
While I understand your point about the radio checkbox,
this show a few bugs or fails in design in Sugar too.
Trying right now I see:
* The text is confusing:
"Turn off the wireless radio to save battery life"
[] Radio
Checked is on or off? What means Radio? Is not clear
* After uncheck the check
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Alan Jhonn Aguiar Schwyn
wrote:
>>One problem that I have seen in various places, children untick the
>>"Radio enable" checkbox in Sugar's control panel and then return their
>>laptop for repair because they can't get online. I fear that proxy
>>configuration could
>One problem that I have seen in various places, children untick the>"Radio
>enable" checkbox in Sugar's control panel and then return their>laptop for
>repair because they can't get online. I fear that proxy>configuration could
>become support headache like this.
Thinking in the same way, we mu
Daniel,
Your concerns are valid.
All I can say that probably using an "automated" "transparent" proxy
client-server setup is the answer, for getting the requirements met without
bothering the kids.
*
The "automatic" mode can be set in the XO-images, via simple "OOB" scripts.
*
The "automatic" m
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Anish Mangal wrote:
> I'd like to propose "Network proxy configuration in Sugar"
>
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Proxy_configuration
I would say that this feature does not fit particularly nicely with
some items of our guidelines:
http://wiki.sugarlabs.o
On 25 January 2012 04:33, Jerry Vonau wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 13:02 +0100, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>> Hi Sridhar and Jarry,
>>
>> can you give a bit of inside on the usage of that Feature in the field?
>> So far I am clear that you did use the gnome-network section to set the
>> proxy. To m
Excerpts from Gary Martin's message of 2012-01-23 03:02:59 +0100:
> Do you think this functionality could be folded into the Network CP UI or are
> there a heap of inputs? We could make better use of Network CP horizontal
> space regarding text blocks, and gain some vertical space to reduce pote
On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 13:02 +0100, Simon Schampijer wrote:
> On 01/23/2012 03:05 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
> > On 23 January 2012 13:02, Gary Martin wrote:
> >> Hi Sridhar,
> >>
> >> On 23 Jan 2012, at 01:08, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 19 January 2012 21:16, Simon Schampijer wro
On 01/23/2012 03:05 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
On 23 January 2012 13:02, Gary Martin wrote:
Hi Sridhar,
On 23 Jan 2012, at 01:08, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
On 19 January 2012 21:16, Simon Schampijer wrote:
If OLPC-AU has been telling their users to set the proxy via GNOME before
that i
On 23 January 2012 13:02, Gary Martin wrote:
> Hi Sridhar,
>
> On 23 Jan 2012, at 01:08, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
>
>> On 19 January 2012 21:16, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>>> If OLPC-AU has been telling their users to set the proxy via GNOME before
>>> that is useful information. Other deployment
Hi Sridhar,
On 23 Jan 2012, at 01:08, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
> On 19 January 2012 21:16, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>> If OLPC-AU has been telling their users to set the proxy via GNOME before
>> that is useful information. Other deployments might have set a proxy in the
>> build itself?
>
> T
On 19 January 2012 21:16, Simon Schampijer wrote:
> If OLPC-AU has been telling their users to set the proxy via GNOME before
> that is useful information. Other deployments might have set a proxy in the
> build itself?
To confirm, we do tell users to configure their proxy using the GNOME
tool (g
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Simon Schampijer wrote:
> On 01/18/2012 03:59 AM, Jerry Vonau wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 16:52 +0100, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>>>
>>> On 21/11/11 21:27, Anish Mangal wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
>>>
On 01/18/2012 03:59 AM, Jerry Vonau wrote:
On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 16:52 +0100, Simon Schampijer wrote:
On 21/11/11 21:27, Anish Mangal wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I'd like to propose "Network proxy configuration in Sugar"
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Prox
On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 16:52 +0100, Simon Schampijer wrote:
> On 21/11/11 21:27, Anish Mangal wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to propose "Network proxy configuration in Sugar"
> >
> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Proxy_configuration
On 21/11/11 21:27, Anish Mangal wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I'd like to propose "Network proxy configuration in Sugar"
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Proxy_configuration
- --
Anish Mangal
Hi Anish,
there have been discussions [1] on how this Feature work
But don't forget that many deployments have solved this in build
customisation, so check that what you do doesn't break what they do.
--
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.s
Yes, Sugar definitely needs this. There are probably many schools that use
proxy servers to control what the kids can browse, etc. and there needs to
be a simple way to set these up.
James Simmons
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Anish Mangal wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I'd like to propose "Network proxy configuration in Sugar"
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Proxy_configuration
- --
Anish Mangal
Dextrose Project Manager
Activity Central
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Com
28 matches
Mail list logo
