Testing Squeak in Ubuntu - Dapper Drake.

>Hi,
>
>I would like to help with ubuntu and squeak. I have a breezy and a
>dapper on my system.
>
>
>Dapper is the amd64 version but I can change if it is needed for the
>tests. It seems the virtual machine does not exist for amd64. What can I
>do to help you ?
>
>Bye
>
>
>  
>

>Damien Cassou writes:
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > I would like to help with ubuntu and squeak. I have a breezy and a
>  > dapper on my system.
>  >
>  >
>  > Dapper is the amd64 version but I can change if it is needed for the
>  > tests. It seems the virtual machine does not exist for amd64. What can I
>  > do to help you ?
>
>The key thing is to test the install for the 32 bit install. The
>idea is to make sure that what's in the dapper release should
>just work. The key audience is teachers and people who're not yet
>sold on Squeak but will try it out if the packages work cleanly.
>
>Just install 32 bit Dapper and try to install Squeak, think about how
>the install works if you're not a knowledgeable Squeaker. Talk to the
>Ubuntu packagers on #ubuntu-motu and explain to them what needs to be
>done so it will work.
>
>We owe this opportunity to Hilaire and the others who've convinced the
>Ubuntu people that Squeak's a great educational platform. What we need
>to do now is make sure that the Ubuntu packages do work for normal
>people. This is the Ubuntu mission and they're a friendly helpful
>crowd. All that you need to do is to test their Squeak packages and
>then explain to them how it works if there are problems.
>
>Bryce

>
> Damien Cassou writes:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to help with ubuntu and squeak. I have a breezy and a
>> dapper on my system.
>>
>>
>> Dapper is the amd64 version but I can change if it is needed for the
>> tests. It seems the virtual machine does not exist for amd64. What  
>> can I
>> do to help you ?
>
> The key thing is to test the install for the 32 bit install. The
> idea is to make sure that what's in the dapper release should
> just work. The key audience is teachers and people who're not yet
> sold on Squeak but will try it out if the packages work cleanly.
>
> Just install 32 bit Dapper and try to install Squeak, think about how
> the install works if you're not a knowledgeable Squeaker. Talk to the
> Ubuntu packagers on #ubuntu-motu and explain to them what needs to be
> done so it will work.
>
> We owe this opportunity to Hilaire and the others who've convinced the
> Ubuntu people that Squeak's a great educational platform. What we need
> to do now is make sure that the Ubuntu packages do work for normal
> people. This is the Ubuntu mission and they're a friendly helpful
> crowd. All that you need to do is to test their Squeak packages and
> then explain to them how it works if there are problems.

>Alan Kay writes:
>  > Just curious as to why this would be an issue. Squeak works fine on any
>  > number of Linux systems, why would there be any special difficulties with
>  > Ubuntu?
>
>Hi Alan,
>
>Squeak when manually installed works fine in Ubuntu. What I'd like is
>to see Squeak installed from the Ubuntu distribution working
>well. This is so people with minimal Unix expertise and no prior
>Squeak experience can get started easily in Squeak while running
>Ubuntu.
>
>Imagine you're a non-technical teacher running Ubuntu (yes Ubuntu is
>targeting educational use), you've heard of Squeak and feel like
>trying it out. Having it properly included in the distribution would
>mean that you just need to ask the package manager to install Squeak
>then start using it. The package will create the appropriate menu
>items and desktop short cuts.
>
>Ubuntu tried to install Squeak in Breezy Badger, their last release.
>They forgot to add an image to their packages. This meant that Squeak
>didn't work. People did try Squeak because it was in Breezy. I know
>this because some of them asked on #squeak-dev about how to get Squeak
>running. Many more probably just gave up without saying anything.
>
>The Ubuntu packagers are convinced that Squeak should be included
>because of it's educational value. But the packagers are not Squeakers
>or even Smalltalkers which means working with images is foreign to
>them. The Squeak install just needs to be tested while there's still
>time to fix bugs, and if there are issues they may need help resolving
>them. We have less than three weeks to make sure it works before their
>next release will be frozen.
>
>The issue is about getting Squeak running flawlessly in a major Linux
>distribution. It's about reducing the barriers to join our community.
>We now have a great opportunity to get Squeak included and working in
>a major Linux distribution, let's make the most of it.
>
>Bryce

> I see.
>
> One thing to think about here is "Squeak" and "Squeak Etoys" as  
> separate things for somewhat different users (this is why we have  
> separate websites).
>
> The Etoys, when downloaded from the Squeakland site, will run both  
> standalone and as a web browser plugin (and the plugin is run in a  
> sandbox for protection, etc.). It would be great to have this  
> preinstalled on the Ubuntu disk.
>
> It might be worthwhile to actually have two different logos to  
> distinguish the two systems for the two sets of users?

>
> Cheers,
>
> Alan
>
> At 02:39 PM 3/24/2006, Bryce Kampjes wrote:
>> Alan Kay writes:
>>  > Just curious as to why this would be an issue. Squeak works  
>> fine on any
>>  > number of Linux systems, why would there be any special  
>> difficulties with
>>  > Ubuntu?
>>
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> Squeak when manually installed works fine in Ubuntu. What I'd like is
>> to see Squeak installed from the Ubuntu distribution working
>> well. This is so people with minimal Unix expertise and no prior
>> Squeak experience can get started easily in Squeak while running
>> Ubuntu.
>>
>> Imagine you're a non-technical teacher running Ubuntu (yes Ubuntu is
>> targeting educational use), you've heard of Squeak and feel like
>> trying it out. Having it properly included in the distribution would
>> mean that you just need to ask the package manager to install Squeak
>> then start using it. The package will create the appropriate menu
>> items and desktop short cuts.
>>
>> Ubuntu tried to install Squeak in Breezy Badger, their last release.
>> They forgot to add an image to their packages. This meant that Squeak
>> didn't work. People did try Squeak because it was in Breezy. I know
>> this because some of them asked on #squeak-dev about how to get  
>> Squeak
>> running. Many more probably just gave up without saying anything.
>>
>> The Ubuntu packagers are convinced that Squeak should be included
>> because of it's educational value. But the packagers are not  
>> Squeakers
>> or even Smalltalkers which means working with images is foreign to
>> them. The Squeak install just needs to be tested while there's still
>> time to fix bugs, and if there are issues they may need help  
>> resolving
>> them. We have less than three weeks to make sure it works before  
>> their
>> next release will be frozen.
>>
>> The issue is about getting Squeak running flawlessly in a major Linux
>> distribution. It's about reducing the barriers to join our community.
>> We now have a great opportunity to get Squeak included and working in
>> a major Linux distribution, let's make the most of it.
>>
>> Bryce
>
>
>

>>I see.
>>
>>One thing to think about here is "Squeak" and "Squeak Etoys" as
>>separate things for somewhat different users (this is why we have
>>separate websites).
>>
>>The Etoys, when downloaded from the Squeakland site, will run both
>>standalone and as a web browser plugin (and the plugin is run in a
>>sandbox for protection, etc.). It would be great to have this
>>preinstalled on the Ubuntu disk.
>>
>>It might be worthwhile to actually have two different logos to
>>distinguish the two systems for the two sets of users?
>
>Indeed. I think that lot of people are confused. But it would be
>great to have squeak and etoy on Ubuntu :)
>We could keep the mouse for etoy and have a competition for getting
>one of Squeak.
>
>Stef
>
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>At 02:39 PM 3/24/2006, Bryce Kampjes wrote:
>>>Alan Kay writes:
>>>  > Just curious as to why this would be an issue. Squeak works
>>>fine on any
>>>  > number of Linux systems, why would there be any special
>>>difficulties with
>>>  > Ubuntu?
>>>
>>>Hi Alan,
>>>
>>>Squeak when manually installed works fine in Ubuntu. What I'd like is
>>>to see Squeak installed from the Ubuntu distribution working
>>>well. This is so people with minimal Unix expertise and no prior
>>>Squeak experience can get started easily in Squeak while running
>>>Ubuntu.
>>>
>>>Imagine you're a non-technical teacher running Ubuntu (yes Ubuntu is
>>>targeting educational use), you've heard of Squeak and feel like
>>>trying it out. Having it properly included in the distribution would
>>>mean that you just need to ask the package manager to install Squeak
>>>then start using it. The package will create the appropriate menu
>>>items and desktop short cuts.
>>>
>>>Ubuntu tried to install Squeak in Breezy Badger, their last release.
>>>They forgot to add an image to their packages. This meant that Squeak
>>>didn't work. People did try Squeak because it was in Breezy. I know
>>>this because some of them asked on #squeak-dev about how to get
>>>Squeak
>>>running. Many more probably just gave up without saying anything.
>>>
>>>The Ubuntu packagers are convinced that Squeak should be included
>>>because of it's educational value. But the packagers are not
>>>Squeakers
>>>or even Smalltalkers which means working with images is foreign to
>>>them. The Squeak install just needs to be tested while there's still
>>>time to fix bugs, and if there are issues they may need help
>>>resolving
>>>them. We have less than three weeks to make sure it works before
>>>their
>>>next release will be frozen.
>>>
>>>The issue is about getting Squeak running flawlessly in a major Linux
>>>distribution. It's about reducing the barriers to join our community.
>>>We now have a great opportunity to get Squeak included and working in
>>>a major Linux distribution, let's make the most of it.
>>>
>>>Bryce
>>
>>
>