[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] How to Make Activity Designers Happy , Parts I and II

[Wade Brainerd]

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Michael Stone <michael at laptop.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 06:12:40PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote:
> > Can you please cite a few examples to help ground me further?
>
> Let's try:
>
>  * the Etoys/Debian fight?
>  * the F6/F7 timeframe Java fight?
>  * the Debian/Fedora fight? (and the Ubuntu/Debian fight?)
>  * the activity packaging formats fight?
>  * the initscripts fight?
>  * the vserver fight?
>  * the libertas fight(s)?
>  * the Bitfrost/____ fight?
>  * the Journal/file manager fight?
>  * the livecd-tools / pilgrim+puritan fight?
>  * the stock vs. patched kernel fight?
>  * the UY, ET, and NE modification fights?
>  * deciding how and where to seek donations to OLPC (or alternately,
>    to market and sell XOs, depending on your perspective).


Not knowing all the gossip, a lot of these seem more like "conservative" vs
"exciting" decisions rather than "libre" vs "usability" or "global" vs
"local".

Programmer/Manager A:  Let's do crazy idea X, it will solve A, B and C and
will be simple to implement!
Programmer/Manager B:  You have no idea what what problems will really arise
with X.  Let's just stick with what works, Y.

<fighting ensues>

This judgment process is a natural part of software development.

As a fun exercise, I personally come down at: Etoys, missed that one,
Debian, something other than xo bundles, custom initscripts!!, KISS,
libertas FTW, the best security is a reflash usb key and backup, both,
probably livecd-tools, PATCHED, let them do whatever they need to, market
away but avoid sponsors.

Cheers,
-Wade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20090102/ee9c71b9/attachment.htm