Yeah, my target here is development and testing, not final users. Basically I'm talking about what Gonzalo has been doing for 0.100. We could automate that work, it just feels a bit wrong to me because it's not using the normal Fedora infrastructure...<div> On Tuesday, 5 November 2013, Walter Bender wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Daniel Narvaez <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com')">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > Going a bit off topic, but a pretty major issue I see in our workflow with > Fedora is that we don't have a good way to develop unstable Sugar on a > stable Fedora. Rawhide is, or at least is perceived as, unstable. And I'm > not sure what would be a good way to, for example, produce and distribute > 0.100 rpms for Fedora 19. We can setup our custom automated build system and > repository of course, but I'm not sure that's a good approach? Part of the > problem here is that upstream tends to depend strongly on very recent > libraries which are not yet available in the stable fedora, though maybe now > that the gi conversion is over we can avoid that. I think it is doable. The more difficult part is getting the Fedora bits to run properly on the XO hardware -- something OLPC had spent lots of time on. So while I think we can make Fedora releases -- and probably should -- they probably won't do much good directly for our major user community. -walter > > > On Tuesday, 5 November 2013, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:14 AM, Walter Bender <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'walter.bender@gmail.com')">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>> >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Daniel Narvaez <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'dwnarvaez@gmail.com')">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>> >> > wrote: >> >> On 4 November 2013 22:53, Sean DALY <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'sdaly.be@gmail.com')">sdaly.be@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> * It's not clear to me where we are going. The OLPC/Sugar development >> >>> ecosystem seems to be at a crossroads. I am encouraged by the web >> >>> activity >> >>> work, but don't understand the path of transposing the value >> >>> proposition of >> >>> Sugar (interface, Journal, collaboration, Activities) to handheld >> >>> tactile >> >>> devices (tablets to smartphones). PCs (of any size) with keyboards are >> >>> no >> >>> longer competitive with tablets for grade-school classroom use. >> >>> Perhaps the >> >>> XO-4 could still be in the running; there is no clear message from >> >>> OLPC. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'll try to express briefly my feelings about the directions the >> >> project >> >> could take. Note that I might be missing a lot of what is going on >> >> above the >> >> technical level. >> >> >> >> * The XO is not a viable hardware platform other than for existing >> >> deployments. OLPC is pretty clearly going in a different direction. >> > >> > I may be alone in thinking that there will be some runway left with >> > the XO. But deployments need alternatives regardless. >> > >> >> * Sugar web activities on the top of a full Android loses too much of >> >> the >> >> Sugar value proposition. It's great to have it in addition to >> >> Sugar-the-OS, >> >> but it's not enough alone. >> > >> > I agree. >> > >> >> * From the technical point of view there are several ways to get >> >> Sugar-the-OS running on tactile devices. Unfortunately it's not clear >> >> to me >> >> that any of these devices is open enough to be viable for deployments >> >> or >> >> "ordinary" users. >> > >> > We looked at ChromeOS a few years back, but at the time it was too >> > heavy for our hardware. Today, it is a different story. Might be a >> > viable option. Certainly running GNU/Linux/Sugar on a ChromeBook is >> > not a bad starting point. >> >> Given that ChromeOS is locked down I don't believe it's viable to ask >> a School to have to break/hack the HW to get it working OOTB. >> >> Having been involved in the OLPC OS side of things I believe you would >> be much better taking the work done by OLPC with things like >> olpc-os-builder and the work upstream with Fedora to use it to build >> out OS images that will work in a similar way across both XOs and >> other HW be it x86 netbook or cheap ARM devices rather than >> reinventing the wheel! >> >> Peter > > > > -- > Daniel Narvaez > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs <a href="http://www.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">http://www.sugarlabs.org</a> </blockquote></div> -- Daniel Narvaez