[IAEP] Tech roadmap

[Daniel Narvaez]

Yes with dependencies I also meant the version of them (for API
incompatible versions at least).

I'm all for getting concrete :)

On Thursday, 7 November 2013, David Farning wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > Re library versions, that reminds of a point I should have put in my
> list...
> >
> > I think now that the gobject introspection migration is over upstream can
> > become more conservative about library versions. That should help both
> > distributors and developers. We are already going in that direction
> really.
> > If we add Webkit1 compatibility as discussed, I think 0.102 might have
> > pretty much the same dependencies of 0.98. The only exception is libxkb
> if I
> > remember correctly, for which introspection was really broken.
>
> In addition to dependencies there can be issues with versions of
> dependencies.
>
> Within the next couple of week we should see these fixes flow
> upstream. So we can start talking about concrete issues and examples
> rather than abstract notions. I think that will help clarify the
> discussion.
>
> AC's challenge was to quietly get a proof of concept in place which
> adds value to deployments before suggesting making changes to
> upstream. Now, AC has to clean up and abstract the proof of concept
> work to prepare it for acceptance upstream.
>
> > On Thursday, 7 November 2013, David Farning 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.
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> 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>



-- 
Daniel Narvaez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20131108/31f32637/attachment-0001.html>