[Debian-olpc-devel] Fwd: sugar

[José L. Redrejo Rodríguez]

El mié, 02-04-2008 a las 10:31 +0300, Jani Monoses escribió:
> And here's a second one. I was hoping we can have the same set of
> packages for debian and ubuntu,
> but apparently wrote too late, as you guys seem to have dona and
> uploaded quite a few already :)
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jani Monoses <jani.monoses at gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:46 PM
> Subject: Re: sugar
> To: Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org>
> Cc: Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk>
> 
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> squeak-vm has just landed in Ubuntu Hardy so I'll be looking into
> packaging etoys.
> 
> What I am asking you is to try look at my existing packages for sugar
> and activities and reuse them for Debian.
> It will save us duplication of work and allow us to cooperate and
> avoid spurious deltas in the future.
> 
> Here's a list albeit with some false positives of packages that have
> sugar in their names:
> 
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+search?text=sugar
> 
> 
>         etoys is the squeak-vm package, already in Debian. "Modified
>         evince" means
>         evince with a sugar ui?
> 
> etoys is a separate image for the squeak VM from my limited knowledge
> of all things squeak so far.


Hi, Jani
I'm the maintainer of the squeak-vm package in Debian. I'll meet Jonas
tomorrow and we can talk about these things, but, previously, maybe you
should know some things:
-squeak-vm in Debian is version 3.9-12, but in Ubuntu is 3.9-8
- This version difference is very important, as 3.9-8 has a non-dfsg
license, so it can not be in Debian (don't know about the Ubuntu
policies, but that vm is a total non-free package)
- Version 3.9-12 in Debian works with 64 bits, but 3.9-8 does not, the
patch ubuntu maintainers have added is not enough, some plugins still
fail.
- Version 3.9-8 is not "olpc" ready
- Debian package is much more desktop-friendly, thinking of
non-technical users, Ubuntu package is more developper friendly (I know
pretty well ubuntu package because it's based on the work I did for the
gnulinex package 5 years ago. They have removed it now from the
changelog, but if you look at squeak-vm changelog in gutsy you still can
see the linex references and my name)

About the etoys packaging:
- My intention is packaging e-toys as a squeak-image, and doing the same
with other squeak images that are around. So, etoys should provide
squeak-image, squeak-image-3.10 should provide squeak-image ,
squeakland-image should provide squeak-image, educarex-image should
provide squeak-image, and so on.
- No one of these images can go to Debian yet, as the relicencing
process of the image has not finished, and thus, they are not DFSG
compatible yet. I'm afraid that won't happen before 8 or 9 months.

I like the olpc project, but at the moment my only relation with it is
my squeak focus. For me, olpc etoys are just another squeak image, and I
don't think they have any sugar relation as you don't need sugar to run
it. I'll add to the squeak-vm package the dbus plugin needed to run on
the olpc, but can also be used in a non-olpc machine, so I won't package
any special thing for sugar. All the squeak stuff will be like any other
Debian package.

In the future I plan to be more involved helping in the debian olpc
project, as soon as my current work load allows it, but not for the
squeak part, as it's not a sugar thing and that will follow his own way.

I hope my position is clear now.
Best regards.
José L.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada
	digitalmente
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-olpc-devel/attachments/20080402/05e7e8c0/attachment.pgp