On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Martin Langhoff martin@laptop.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
SOPs covering the basics are always useful though, being "dynamic" is a cop out excuse IMO and SOPs help for when people get eaten by raptors.
I can't find what you say documented anywhere ;-)
Peter -- stop for a second and think with me. This isn't a standard anything: we are transitioning to a new arch, using Fedora as a base which has been somewhat unpredictable and rather messy. We don't plan to switch arches again soon.
I'm referring to things like how to pick which activities are used by OOB, a new arch has nothing to do with that what so ever.
We had F13, with odd differences and gaps between our 2 SOP builds (f11, f14); we had early f14 builds with all sorts of ad hoc fixes ot get them to go. Horrid you say? Well, it's helped us have as current an OS as possible, which helped us be where we are.
Again not referring to upstream OS stuff but OOB processes which should make no difference if its a mainline release, a rawhide release or a build using any other arch.
The SOP begins when we can sync with 11.3.0 build procedures, and I look forward to sorting that out with you and dsd. In the meantime, please work with Gonzalo, I guess configuring the OOB plugin that pulls directly from ASLO.
SOP should be for things like "how do I specific which Activities are included in a particular release".... that is what I'm referring to. That is a SOP because the process is standard whether its a stable release or a dev one, the x86 platform or ARM. So if you want to be specific show me the x86 SOP for the 11.2 release for specifying the Activities included in the release. From there I would be able to work out how to do the same for 11.3.x dev releases for ARM :-)
Peter
On Aug 23, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Martin Langhoff martin@laptop.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
SOPs covering the basics are always useful though, being "dynamic" is a cop out excuse IMO and SOPs help for when people get eaten by raptors.
I can't find what you say documented anywhere ;-)
Peter -- stop for a second and think with me. This isn't a standard anything: we are transitioning to a new arch, using Fedora as a base which has been somewhat unpredictable and rather messy. We don't plan to switch arches again soon.
I'm referring to things like how to pick which activities are used by OOB, a new arch has nothing to do with that what so ever.
I believe OOB is pulling activities and version information from here:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1
Update the links to the latest version and on the next build you should get the respective activity version.
Reuben
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Reuben K. Caron reuben@laptop.org wrote:
On Aug 23, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Martin Langhoff martin@laptop.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
SOPs covering the basics are always useful though, being "dynamic" is
a cop out excuse IMO and SOPs help for when people get eaten by
raptors.
I can't find what you say documented anywhere ;-)
Peter -- stop for a second and think with me. This isn't a standard
anything: we are transitioning to a new arch, using Fedora as a base
which has been somewhat unpredictable and rather messy. We don't plan
to switch arches again soon.
I'm referring to things like how to pick which activities are used by OOB, a new arch has nothing to do with that what so ever.
I believe OOB is pulling activities and version information from here: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1 Update the links to the latest version and on the next build you should get the respective activity version.
Thank you Reuben, that is what I was after. Are people happy for me to update those versions to later releases?
Peter
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Peter Robinson wrote:
I believe OOB is pulling activities and version information from here: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1 Update the links to the latest version and on the next build you should get the respective activity version.
Thank you Reuben, that is what I was after. Are people happy for me to update those versions to later releases?
You should modify the subpage for the release you're working on -- see e.g. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1/11.2
Thanks,
- Chris.
On Aug 23, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Peter Robinson wrote:
I believe OOB is pulling activities and version information from here: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1 Update the links to the latest version and on the next build you should get the respective activity version.
Thank you Reuben, that is what I was after. Are people happy for me to update those versions to later releases?
You should modify the subpage for the release you're working on -- see e.g. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1/11.2
In that case, the .ini should be altered:
[sugar_activity_group] url=http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1
http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/examples/f14-arm.ini...
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Reuben K. Caron wrote:
You should modify the subpage for the release you're working on -- see e.g. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1/11.2
In that case, the .ini should be altered:
[sugar_activity_group] url=http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1
No. That string's just providing the base URL to use -- when o-o-b is looking for activities, it will append the major/minor/release version numbers to it.
- Chris.
At this point (with my limited knowledge) I don't believe o-o-b uses the Wiki at all. It just looks straight at activities.sugarlabs.org for the latest experimental activities compatible with Sugar 0.92.
See the [sugarlabs_activities] section of http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/examples/f14-xo1.5.i..., which the git changelog says currently is the initial 11.3.0 XO-1.5 configuration.
The 11.2.0 INI examples in the same directory have an example of a [sugar_activity_group] section being used, but the 11.3.0 config does not have one yet as it is not frozen.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Chris Ball cjb@laptop.org wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Reuben K. Caron wrote:
You should modify the subpage for the release you're working on -- see e.g. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1/11.2
In that case, the .ini should be altered:
[sugar_activity_group] url=http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1
No. That string's just providing the base URL to use -- when o-o-b is looking for activities, it will append the major/minor/release version numbers to it.
- Chris.
-- Chris Ball cjb@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
At this point (with my limited knowledge) I don't believe o-o-b uses the Wiki at all. It just looks straight at activities.sugarlabs.org for the latest experimental activities compatible with Sugar 0.92.
See the [sugarlabs_activities] section of http://dev.laptop.org/git/ projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/examples/f14-xo1.5.ini , which the git changelog says currently is the initial 11.3.0 XO-1.5 configuration.
The 11.2.0 INI examples in the same directory have an example of a [sugar_activity_group] section being used, but the 11.3.0 config does not have one yet as it is not frozen.
Oh, you're right -- we only use the wiki page once we want manual control of all of the activity versions. So "sugarlabs_activities" is used during development, and "sugar_activity_group" is used when frozen.
So the question is "Since our config enables sugarlabs_activities, how come we didn't get the latest versions of all of the activities?".
Peter, it looks like one of your commits changed this a few days ago. See:
http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/commit/?h=f14-arm&id=...
Which removed the [sugarlabs_activities] config definitions from examples/f14-arm.ini, even though it left the module itself enabled. (Without those definitions, the sugarlabs_activities code isn't going to do anything.)
Thanks,
- Chris.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Chris Ball cjb@laptop.org wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
At this point (with my limited knowledge) I don't believe o-o-b uses the Wiki at all. It just looks straight at activities.sugarlabs.org for the latest experimental activities compatible with Sugar 0.92.
See the [sugarlabs_activities] section of http://dev.laptop.org/git/ projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/examples/f14-xo1.5.ini , which the git changelog says currently is the initial 11.3.0 XO-1.5 configuration.
The 11.2.0 INI examples in the same directory have an example of a [sugar_activity_group] section being used, but the 11.3.0 config does not have one yet as it is not frozen.
Oh, you're right -- we only use the wiki page once we want manual control of all of the activity versions. So "sugarlabs_activities" is used during development, and "sugar_activity_group" is used when frozen.
So the question is "Since our config enables sugarlabs_activities, how come we didn't get the latest versions of all of the activities?".
Peter, it looks like one of your commits changed this a few days ago. See:
http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/commit/?h=f14-arm&id=...
Which removed the [sugarlabs_activities] config definitions from examples/f14-arm.ini, even though it left the module itself enabled. (Without those definitions, the sugarlabs_activities code isn't going to do anything.)
Thanks for all the information.
It was due to the request to "have the same list of Activities as 11.2", it seems i need to do some more so it pulls in the latest versions of that list. I'll look at it this week so we can have it fixed for the next build.
This is why SOPs are good. I think there was half a dozen or so replies (both on list and IRC) as to what people though the procedure was. If there was a group of OOB SOPs for both Stable and Dev releases it would all be nicely documented somewhere central :-)
Peter
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
This is why SOPs are good. I think there was half a dozen or so replies (both on list and IRC) as to what people though the procedure was. If there was a group of OOB SOPs for both Stable and Dev releases it would all be nicely documented somewhere central :-)
Just to add what I mentioned on IRC, there is already quite extensive documentation for the release process and details such as these: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_Process (and sub pages)
It is perhaps lacking in some details on this particular point (such as the exact olpc-os-builder config lines needed to implement the process as described), but if people read that, discussions such as these would not veer so far off-course.
These difficulties are also temporary, Peter seems to have been thrown various release manager tasks which he will not have to deal with once the ARM work joins the 11.3.0 stream. This should be the priority; I think it would be beneficial if we were to be more understanding that ARM builds are currently not fully in sync. Once Peter has managed to eliminate the remaining package differences, allowing him to join the stream, many of these problems will be automatically resolved (through updated packages, and through not duplicating release management work). Providing Peter with less distractions so that he can focus on the real issues would probably be beneficial.
I am not away, I am responsive to emails and IRC every day, and I am working. I simply don't have as many hours available as normal for a little while longer.
Daniel
On Aug 23, 2011, at 9:36 AM, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Reuben K. Caron wrote:
You should modify the subpage for the release you're working on -- see e.g. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1/11.2
In that case, the .ini should be altered:
[sugar_activity_group] url=http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities/G1G1
No. That string's just providing the base URL to use -- when o-o-b is looking for activities, it will append the major/minor/release version numbers to it.
Ah yes, clear from here:
http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/modules/sugar_activi...
Not clear from here:
http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/olpc-os-builder/tree/modules/sugar_activi...
Reuben
-
Chris Ball -
Daniel Drake -
Peter Robinson -
Reuben K. Caron -
Samuel Greenfeld