On 1 Aug 2010, at 15:20, Tomeu Vizoso <to...@sugarlabs.org> wrote: > Hi, > > long time ago we decided that when an activity bundle was removed from > the journal, it should also be uninstalled. > > There's a report from Uruguay about teachers not expecting this and > considering it a bug. > > What are people's opinions on requiring two separate steps to delete > an activity bundle from the journal and uninstalling it?
Unless we can agree on the Journal becomes the place to manage bundles — something I thought was a future desire/hope — I'd vote for separating Journal bundle deletion from the activity uninstall step. However, we have UX reports from deployer/deployments that home list view is confusing users (they think they are in the Journal; they are expecting the home ring and are now lost). One obvious solution (Walter already raised this) would be to remove list view and manage activities from the Journal. All installed activities would need to show up in the Journal for management, we'd need an obvious way to quickly filter for them, favourite/un-favourite them, and add the various safeguards to prevent their unintentional/unwanted erasure. There's at least one deployer who seems strongly against this use of the Journal each time it is raised (argument is if the user didn't create it, it shouldn't be in their Journal). Regards, --Gary > Thanks, > > Tomeu > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 16:02, Daniel Castelo > <dcast...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:51 PM, Frederick Grose <fgr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:37 PM, James Cameron <qu...@laptop.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 06:37:18PM -0300, Daniel Castelo wrote: >>>>> * The activities are updated >>>> >>>> With "Software update" or manually using Browse? >>>> >>>>> * The user delete the journal entry with the activity bundle >>>>> downloaded for this updating process. >>>>> >>>>> The result of this is that the activity is deleted from sugar >>>> >>>> I've seen this on Sugar 0.84 if the activity was updated using Browse, >>>> but not if the activity was updated using "Software update". >>>> >>>>> This behavour is normal? Should I reported this as a bug? >>>> >>>> If you think it is a bug, then check for it in bugs.sugarlabs.org >>> >>> See https://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1512 >> >> Great. Thanks! >> The trac ticket suggest a new behavour: >> >> "The download event record, as a system event, might have a 'hide event' >> option or not be erasable. The code bundle behind the event should, perhaps, >> only be erased from the Home list view (installed-Activity-code-bundle >> management), while system or Activity events and their associated object >> instances are managed from the Journal of Activity event instances." >> >> Which is the next step that I should follow to solve this issue? I suposse >> that is to discuss in this email list which could be the best solution. >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> or >>>> report it there. I'm not sure what the behaviour should be. I'd be >>>> happy to see it fixed though, so that a user would have to both remove >>>> the download and remove the activity. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> James Cameron >> >> >> -- >> Ing. Daniel Castelo >> Plan Ceibal - Área Técnica >> Avda. Italia 6201 >> Montevideo - Uruguay. >> Tel.: 601.57.73 Interno 2228 >> E-mail : dcast...@plan.ceibal.edu.uy >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sugar-devel mailing list >> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel >> >> _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
