[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] Supporting Sugar .88 on the XO1
David Farning
dfarning at gmail.com
Fri May 21 10:12:35 EDT 2010
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 4:46 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net> wrote:
> 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)?
Excellent point,
I'll start a blog and request that it be syndicated on the Sugar Labs
and OLPC planets.
> Regards,
>
> Tomeu
>
>> david
>>> paul
>>>
>>>
>>> > 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
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
More information about the IAEP
mailing list