On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Daniel Drake <d...@laptop.org> wrote: > It would be possible to make Sugar support both - but I'm not sure how > feasible that is.
I just spent 30 minutes on this. Starting with Peter's patch from the Fedora package, I now have it displaying network circles and connecting to unsecured wifi on NM-0.9. My opinion is that its not feasible to make Sugar support both. Already Peter's patch (which is an attempt at a straight port with no back-compat) is: 6 files changed, 197 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-) and thats incomplete work. To finish it off and wrap it in a load of if conditions, well, we're talking about a lot of mess. The move represents a shift in design. Previously, Sugar had to implement a dbus service which managed network connections. Now NetworkManager does that for us. The nice thing about this is that it allows a vast simplification of code on the Sugar side, but this also makes supporting both versions even less realistic. > If we need to choose between one or the other, I think Sugar-0.94 > should support NM-0.9, because I'm now assuming that is the norm. It > certainly is for Fedora, and Peter suggests that it probably is for > openSUSE (and any other distro that uses gnome-shell, where NM-0.9 is > a requirement). Can anyone speak for other distros? Ubuntu currently ships v0.8, but their next release (Oneric, to be released in October, and which Sugar-0.94 schedule is indirectly based around) will have 0.9. I'm going to continue working on this as moving to NM-0.9 will immediately kick out a bunch of bugs we have, and it goes hand in hand with the networking work I am doing in other areas. Whether this makes 0.94 or not depends on community consensus, and whether this work can be completed and reviewed before the August 15th deadline (already feels a bit unlikely). Daniel _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel