[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] Supporting Sugar .88 on the XO1
tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net
Fri May 21 05:46:07 EDT 2010
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 02:04, David Farning <dfarning at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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:)
Any blog we could syndicate in the planet(s)?
>> > 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
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
More information about the IAEP