Initial F14 developers-only release for XO and XO-1.5

[Daniel Drake]

On 4 September 2010 03:24, Mikus Grinbergs <mikus at bga.com> wrote:
>> For now, please don't file bugs unless you include patches.
>
> I can understand not wanting bug reports against items which OLPC/Sugar
> are still in the process of changing.  But why defer reporting problems
> which might not be addressed unless there was a report ?

Because nobody other than me is fixing the problems right now, and the
bugs will go stale. And if someone is available to fix bugs, you only
have to spend 5 minutes working with the image to encounter several of
them. A bug tracker is needless overhead for such early and "loose"
development.

This of course will change with time, if the project continues to progress.

> For instance, Read-87 fails to launch on XO-1 os1 (F14) when it tries to
>  'import evince'.  Though the necessary gnome-python2-evince package was
> not included in the os1 build, when I manually install that package from
> the yum Fedora-14 repositories, the import statement still fails --
> apparently because the evince.so module provided by the current
> Fedora-14 package has internal inconsistencies.  I myself do not have a
> Python test case which does 'import evince' - nor do I have a patch -
> but perhaps the maintainers of the Read Activity might want to discuss
> this situation with the maintainers of Python on Fedora 14.

As this is a topic purely related to Sugar you are welcome to file a
bug on the SL bug tracker, or start a discussion on the sugar mailing
list.

I should also clarify that if you have an easy solution for a bug
(such as: add package XYZ) you are welcome to file a bug - by "only
file bugs with patches" I guess I meant "only file bugs with patches
or simple solutions"

I'm just trying to focus and organize the OS-level work, and to avoid
wasting time on bug tracking in this early stage. Thanks for working
with me on this...

Daniel