[Debian-olpc-devel] Sugar 0.90

Luke Faraone luke at faraone.cc
Wed Jul 28 18:39:01 UTC 2010

Hash: SHA1

On 07/28/2010 01:54 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> What was news to me - and that I still do not find in your [1] even now
> reading it again, is that what David indicates as a larger coordinated
> plan related to that.

Oh, right. I didn't know about that either, but, as David said, I
suspect that is because the idea is still in the planning stage.

On 07/28/2010 02:00 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> As I wrote earlier, I suggest we explicitly promote those activities in
> our long description field as nice activities due to them being coded
> flexible enough to support all of the branches that we track in Debian.
> Any opinions on that?  Suggestions on actual wording?

No idea. I personally find it commendable from a development point of
view, but I'm not sure the best way to express that to users.

By the way, I've noticed informally via IRC that some people are
confused by the "sugar-SOMETHING-activity-LOWESTBRANCH" naming. From
what I understand, it's LOWESTBRANCH and later. Maybe it might be good
to expressly state "This package is compatible with Sugar X and later."
(yes, I know it's duplicating what's already in the deps, but it's still

- -- 
Luke Faraone
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the Debian-olpc-devel mailing list