[IAEP] [Marketing] [Sugar-devel] Tech roadmap

Walter Bender walter.bender at gmail.com
Thu Nov 7 07:58:04 EST 2013

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:08 PM, David Farning
<dfarning at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> I agree :)
> Right now, we are sitting back and seeing what roll OLPC-Australia is
> going to play in the ecosystem. The One Education distribution out of
> Australia is a combination of Dextrose, Sugar .100 and some custom
> patches. My semi-informed guess is that Walter and Rangan (
> https://www.laptop.org.au/about ) are going to position One Education
> as the successor to OLPC-OS. I hope that we will learn more at about
> their plans at basecamp. ( http://olpcbasecamp.blogspot.com/ ) This
> would take care or the leading edge on Fedora.

No need to guess. We have put together a combination of Sugar 100 and
Fedora 18 and added some patches that we hope will land in Sugar 102
(See [1]). We've made these bits available for testing [2] and are
planning extensive testing in some classrooms in Australia this month.
We have confidence that this is the most stable build to date. We
welcome others to test and have already received feedback and bug
reports from numerous sources. As far as positioning ourselves as the
successor to OLPC-OS, I don't understand what you mean. Since we are a
small team., we have no choice but to make the correct choice to work
upstream and as broadly as possible. And of course, anyone is welcome
to leverage our efforts.

> On the Ubuntu side we have a bit of a challenge balancing bleeding
> edge and stability. Sugar and Fedora tend to run a bit ahead of Debian
> and Ubuntu in library versions. It take a significant amount of effort
> to backport the necessary libraries to Ubuntu LTS. For this release we
> agreed that the proper balance of innovation and stability was Sugar
> .98 on Ubuntu 12.04. The next decision point will be which version of
> Sugar to use for the 14.04 release due in the second quarter of 2014.

Not sure why Sugar 0.98 is considered more stable than Sugar 100. Some
specifics would be helpful in our efforts to make Sugar 102 more
stable still. Regarding the efforts support Sugar on Ubuntu, Jerry had
suggested in an earlier post that there were some places where Sugar
had hard-coded assumptions about both Fedora and OLPC hardware. It
would be helpful to upstream (and presumably to AC) if those changes
were flagged so we could fix upstream. Presumably it would save
everyone headaches (on all distros and hardware).

> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Cool stuff.
>> As for Fedora it would be great to have builds with the latest sugar (stable
>> and unstable) releases. I'm not saying to ship those to deployments of
>> course, but they would help upstream development, marketing and testing...
>> And they would help AC to make the transition to the next sugar release
>> smoother.
>> On 7 November 2013 02:05, David Farning <dfarning at activitycentral.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Please see the link at the bottom left of http://dextrose.ac/platform/
>>> for the Sugar on Ubuntu images which Activity Central and Plan Ceibal
>>> are jointly developing.
>>> For stability it is based on Ubuntu 12.04 and Sugar .98. The testing
>>> is done on classmate to meet Plan Ceibal's specifications. I should
>>> work equally well on any machine that boots Ubuntu.
>>> It is currently is small scale testing by a couple hundred teachers.
>>> When the image meets Ceibal's quality standards the pilot will scale
>>> to approximately 10,000 units for wider testing.
>>> For more information, I have CC Anish Mangal, the project owner (agile
>>> speak) and Ruben Rodriguez the lead developer. Ruben has the strongest
>>> back ground on the technical issues involved in the port. Anish has
>>> the deepest understanding of timelines and objectives.
>>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > On 6 November 2013 16:20, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> > Classmates are basically just x86 netbooks, I've not tried it as I
>>> >> > don't have HW but I don't see any reason they shouldn't work OOTB.
>>> >>
>>> >> Yep. Sugar is running in classmates out of the box.  In Uruguay for
>>> >> example.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > You mean people are using them in Uruguay deployments? Which distro?
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> > Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>> >
>>> --
>>> David Farning
>>> Activity Central: http://www.activitycentral.com
>> --
>> Daniel Narvaez
> --
> David Farning
> Activity Central: http://www.activitycentral.com
> _______________________________________________
> Marketing mailing list
> Marketing at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing



[1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.102/Feature_List
[2] http://dev.laptop.org/~gonzalo/AU1B/
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs

More information about the IAEP mailing list