[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] Supporting Sugar .88 on the XO1
dfarning at gmail.com
Thu May 20 20:04:50 EDT 2010
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Paul Fox <pgf at laptop.org> wrote:
> david wrote:
> > As Bernie announced, we working on supporting Sugar .88 on the XO-1.
> hi david --
> for those of us joining this thread late, can you expand on what/who
> you mean by "we"? (or tell me to read the archives, if that's
> more appropriate.)
Sorry, By we, I mean Activity Central and compnay that Bernie,
Caroline, and I have started to support OLPC and Sugar deployments.
It is going to take me awhile to figure out how to communicate with
the community. I would like to keep the larger Sugar and OLPC
projects aware of what our company is doing. But, I don't what it to
sound like a press release of pitch for the company:)
> > This projects is customer driven by the deployment in Paraguay. They,
> > along with bernie, made a decision that it would be more useful,
> > usable, and cost effective to settle on .88 rather than .82. This
> > strictly a decision made by a single deployment, which I support.
> > As an ecosystem we can make lists of Pros on Cons why this is a good
> > or bad decision and why I am an idiot. At the end of the day this was
> > a decision made by a deployment. The primary reason for this decision
> > is that the deployment does not yet has an established base of .82
> > machines. Something we need to be aware of as developers is that
> > deployments think on a much longer scale. As developers, if we have a
> > bug we can commit a fix and rebuild within a few days. Deployments
> > can take weeks if not months to push a minor update.
> > Major version upgrades are something developers can do every six
> > months. From my experience a couple couple of weeks of 'hmmm, better
> > file a bug on that' and I have well running machines after an upgrade.
> > For a enterprise, such as a deployment, the decision to update
> > becomes much harder and takes much longer to implement. As Martin
> > pointed out, a significant amount of Quality Assurance goes into a
> > deployment upgrade. Not only do the hardware, OS, and learning
> > platform need to work together, all infrastructure, activities and
> > third party applications must also work after the update. The problem
> > just got significantly harder:) If I hit a bug while while sitting in
> > my office that is one thing. If a teacher hits a bug where the
> > computers no longer connect to the server that is another thing
> > entirely.
> > On the other hand, there have been several significant improvements in
> > both Sugar and Fedora over the last couple of releases. It would be
> > valuable to make those improvement available to end users.
> > My research has indicated that education institutions find that 3
> > years is the right balance between stability and improved
> > functionality of new software. Because to the newness of the Sugar 2
> > years is a reasonable first round of updates due to the higher than
> > normal increases in usefulness and usability.
> > Blame and credit are important motivators in this game:( As such, if
> > we fail, it is the fault of Bernie, paraguayeduca, and I for: 1)
> > starting with a bad premise, 2) making bad technical decision, or 3)
> > making bad operational decisions. If we fail it will be due to the
> > cooperative efforts of deployments, Sugar Labs, OLPC, and other
> > interested third parties.
> > david
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sugar-devel mailing list
> > Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> paul fox, pgf at laptop.org
More information about the IAEP